Key Votes:

During consideration of a minibus appropriations bill (H.R. 5895), Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced an amendment to repeal the EPA’s 2015 “Waters of the United States” rule, which allows federal bureaucrats to broadly interpret the meaning of “navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act. This rule, Lee opined on the Senate floor, “effectively dramatically expanded the jurisdiction of the Federal Government over land in the United States, in some instances saying that if a plot of land is wet some of the time, some of the year, during any particular year, you can be subject to massive fines totaling millions of dollars if you do anything on that land, subject to the arbitrary determinations of Federal bureaucrats.”

The Senate tabled (killed) Lee’s amendment on June 21, 2018 by a vote of 62 to 34 (Roll Call 138). We have assigned pluses to the nays because both federal water regulations and the EPA are unconstitutional, and if the rule were allowed to stand, activities such as farming and real estate development would be greatly hampered, since farmers and developers would be subject to increased unconstitutional permit requirements and fines concerning their treatment of almost any body of water, no matter how small.

The Senate rejected a motion to discharge H.R. 3 from the Senate Budget Committee (so that it could be considered by the full Senate) on June 20, 2018 by a vote of 48 to 50 (Roll Call 134). We have assigned pluses to the yeas not only because the spending falls outside the scope of constitutionally authorized federal powers, but also because the federal government needs to start reining in ballooning federal spending (and debt) somewhere in order to avert fiscal disaster. The cuts in this bill comprise only a fraction of one percent of total federal spending, and according to the Congressional Budget Office, most of the unspent funding targeted by the bill would not be spent anyway. Yet modest cuts are better than none at all.

During consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 5515), Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced the Due Process Guarantee Act amendment to uphold the right to due process for U.S. citizens and permanent residents on American soil. “This amendment … simply says that if you are a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident, you may not be indefinitely detained on U.S. soil without trial, without charge, without access to a jury or to counsel,” Lee said on the Senate floor. His amendment would negate language in the fiscal year 2012 NDAA that purportedly authorizes the U.S. military to indefinitely detain American citizens accused of being terrorists, without habeas corpus and without being tried and found guilty in a court of law.

The Senate rejected a motion to table (kill) Lee’s amendment on June 13, 2018 by a vote of 30 to 68 (Roll Call 122). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the war on terror must not be allowed to destroy constitutionally guaranteed legal protections.

In March 2018, President Trump nominated Gina Haspel to be director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who opposed Haspel’s nomination, explained why in a Politico Magazine article: “Haspel ran a secret [CIA ‘black site’] center in Thailand where prisoners were tortured”; “Haspel participated in and helped develop the program that our own government has labeled torture”; and “she helped destroy the very evidence of this program.” Regarding the latter, Haspel ordered the destruction of videos documenting the torture.

The Senate confirmed Trump’s nomination of Haspel on May 17, 2018 by a vote of 54 to 45 (Roll Call 101). We have assigned pluses to the nays because of Haspel’s complicity in the use of torture, including waterboarding, a violation of U.S. law as well as the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment prohibition against “cruel and unusual punishments.”

This bill (Senate Joint Resolution 52) would nullify and disapprove of the new Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule that seeks to deregulate the Internet. In 2015, as a result of fears that providers would “throttle” customers’ Internet connections and charge higher rates for certain times and/or services, the Obama-era FCC imposed common-carrier mandates on broadband Internet service providers, essentially regulating the Internet as a public utility. The Trump FCC under Chairman Ajit Pai overturned this rule, allowing the Internet to be more or less unregulated as it had been before the rule.

The Senate passed Senate Joint Resolution 52 on May 16, 2018 by a vote of 52 to 47 (Roll Call 97). We have assigned pluses to the nays because regulation of the Internet is not a proper function of the federal government under the Constitution. The new FCC rule under Commissioner Pai was more of a hands-off approach to the Internet, allowing service providers to set their own rules. This is the correct approach, as any provider “throttling” service or overcharging customers will lose business to more competitive providers in a free market setting. Government, in scenarios such as these, will nearly always cause more problems than it claims to attempt to solve. Case in point: Regulations are not always applied equally, as under the Obama FCC rule some sites were forced to “play fair,” while some of the big guys, such as Netflix and Google, could still set their own rules.

This bill (H.R. 1625) would provide $1.3 trillion in discretionary appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2018 for federal government operations and services. This represents an overall increase in discretionary spending of 12 percent over the 2017 level. The big winner was the Department of Defense, with an increase of 10 percent over last year’s appropriations. (See House Vote 25 for more information.)

The Senate passed the omnibus spending bill on March 23, 2018 by a vote of 65 to 32 (Roll Call 63). We have assigned pluses to the nays because with this omnibus bill, members of Congress are failing to address their fiscally and constitutionally irresponsible budgeting and appropriating process that is currently yielding annual federal deficits measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars, as well as minimizing their accountability to the voters by combining all discretionary federal spending for fiscal 2018 into one gigantic “take it or leave it” bill.

This resolution (Senate Joint Res. 54), according to the text, would “direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by Congress.”

The Senate agreed to table (kill) a motion to discharge this resolution from the Foreign Relations Committee (so that it could be considered by the full Senate) on March 20, 2018 by vote of 55 to 44 (Roll Call 58). We have assigned pluses to the nays because only Congress is vested with the power to declare war. A foreign military intervention is an act of war, and Congress has not authorized any intervention or war in Yemen. Nor should Congress do so, since the civil war in Yemen does not threaten the United States.

During consideration of the immigration bill (H.R. 2579), Senator Christopher Coons (D-Del.) introduced an amendment to provide “conditional permanent residence” (i.e., amnesty) to the unaccompanied minors who illegally entered the United States before turning 18 years old and have been recipients of President Obama’s unconstitutional Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

The Senate did not vote directly on Coons’ amendment, but on a motion to invoke cloture (and thus limit debate) so the amendment could come up for a vote. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on February 15, 2018 by a vote of 52 to 47 (Roll Call 33; a three-fifths majority of the entire Senate is required to invoke cloture). We have assigned pluses to the nays because Obama’s executive action creating DACA was an unconstitutional usurpation of legislative power belonging to Congress, and because granting amnesty to illegal immigrants will, as has been the case with past amnesties, encourage even more border jumping.

During consideration of the immigration bill (H.R. 2579), Senator Pat Toomey (R-Penn.) introduced an amendment to prohibit the disbursement of federal development grants to cities, states, or other political subdivisions that harbor or provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants.

The Senate did not vote directly on Toomey’s amendment, but on a motion to invoke cloture (and thus limit debate) so the amendment could come up for a vote. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on February 15, 2018 by a vote of 54 to 45 (Roll Call 34; a three-fifths majority of the entire Senate is required to invoke cloture). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the flood of illegal immigrants into the United States has risen to the level of an invasion swamping our Republic, and political entities that provide sanctuary to illegal aliens in contravention of federal immigration laws should not expect to do so while receiving federal aid.

This bill (S. 139) would reauthorize for six years, through 2023, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which governs electronic surveillance of foreign terrorism suspects. The bill would require the development of procedures for searching the NSA database that would protect the Fourth Amendment-guaranteed rights of U.S. citizens, while allowing the FBI to access information with an order from the secret FISA Court, in certain cases.

The Senate passed S. 139 on January 18, 2018 by a vote of 65 to 34 (Roll Call 12). We have assigned pluses to the nays because FISA, while supposedly put in place to gather intelligence on foreign targets, has been used to spy on U.S. citizens. While the bill does provide provisions to, ostensibly, protect the privacy of U.S. citizens, given the track record of intelligence agencies, it is unlikely that they would actually follow these rules. The FISA Court gives a green light to just about any surveillance request that comes its way, and FISA-approved NSA warrantless surveillance of American citizens has become common knowledge.

This bill, known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (H.R. 1), would slash the corporate income-tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent, cut individual income-tax rates through 2025, and effectively eliminate the tax penalty on Americans who do not purchase health insurance by reducing the penalty amount to zero. The latter was a cornerstone of the 2010 ObamaCare legislation.

The Senate passed the final version of H.R. 1 on December 20, 2017 by a vote of 51 to 48 (Roll Call 323). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the tax cuts in this bill will keep more money in the hands of American businesses and consumers, where it can be invested into the economy, thus spurring economic growth. Unfortunately, however, the bill does not address federal spending, which needs to be reined in via other legislation.

This bill (H.R. 2266) would make available $36.5 billion in emergency supplemental funding for fiscal 2018 to partially cover the costs of responding to multiple natural disasters, including hurricanes and wildfires. It would include $18.7 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Disaster Relief Fund and would cancel $16 billion of the Treasury debt incurred by FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program.

The Senate agreed to pass H.R. 2266 on October 24, 2017 by a vote of 82 to 17 (Roll Call 248). We have assigned pluses to the nays because federal involvement in natural disaster relief is not only unconstitutional, but also wasteful, inefficient, ineffective, and often harmful, as The New American has pointed out numerous times. Federal intervention into natural disaster recovery efforts typically makes matters worse for those who are afflicted by the disaster, as federal bureaucrats are often ill-informed of the needs of those affected and attempt to take control of relief efforts away from state and local organizations that better understand the situation. Disaster relief is much better handled by states, counties, and local communities, coupled with volunteer efforts from across the country. As it stands now, most disaster relief work is already done by private entities.

During consideration of the budget resolution (House Concurrent Resolution 71), Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) introduced an amendment to cut $43 billion in budget authority in fiscal 2018. Senator Paul remarked on October 17, 2017, “I want a big, big very bold tax cut. I’m for the bigger the better. And I will settle for less than I want. But I do want the biggest. And I will agitate to make sure that everybody across-the-board gets a tax cut… I can’t get a Republican to sign on, because they give lip service to smaller government, but they’re afraid of their shadow. And not a damn one of them really are for cutting spending.”

The Senate rejected Paul’s amendment on October 19, 2017 by a vote of 5 to 95 (Roll Call 236). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because federal spending, much of which is unconstitutional, is out of control and needs to be reined in. While a $43 billion budget cut is small in comparison to the trillion-dollar-plus budgets in recent years, it is a symbolic act that should be applauded.

The Senate rejected Sanders’ amendment on October 18, 2017 by a vote of 47 to 51 (Roll Call 221). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the U.S. Constitution does not authorize the federal government to get involved in healthcare, and all government meddling causes more healthcare problems, such as rising healthcare costs.

On March 7, 2017, President Donald Trump re-nominated Ajit Pai to serve another five-year term on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). One of President Trump’s first official acts was designating Commissioner Pai as the new FCC chairman to replace outgoing Obama-pick Tom Wheeler. As an outspoken opponent of “Net Neutrality,” Pai’s appointment as FCC chairman marked a major milestone toward ending government regulation of the Internet. On December 14, 2017, the FCC — with Pai at the helm — voted 3-2 to end Net Neutrality.

The Senate confirmed Ajit Pai on October 2, 2017 by a vote of 52 to 41 (Roll Call 209). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the U.S. Constitution does not authorize the federal government to get involved in the Internet, which operates best without intrusive government regulation.

During consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2810), Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) offered an amendment to repeal, six months after the bill’s enactment, the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). Enacted in the wake of 9/11, the AUMF authorized the president to use military force against the terrorists involved, including those who aided and harbored them, and was used as the legal authority for U.S. military entry into Afghanistan. Paul’s amendment would also have ended, six months after the bill’s enactment, the 2002 AUMF for the invasion of Iraq to disarm Saddam Hussein of his reputed weapons of mass destruction.

The Senate agreed to a motion to table (kill) Paul’s amendment on September 13, 2017 by a vote of 61 to 36 (Roll Call 195). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the 2001 AUMF in particular has been used by presidents ever since as a blank check not only for continued U.S. military intervention in Afghanistan, but for new military interventions elsewhere, including Libya, Syria, and Yemen — despite the fact that constitutionally authorized power to declare war belongs to Congress, not the president. “This is your constitutional role,” Paul said on the Senate floor prior to the vote on his amendment. “Let’s let these [AUMFs] expire, and over the next six months, let’s debate whether we should be at war and where.”

This bill (H.R. 3364) would establish new sanctions, and codify certain existing sanctions, on Russia. The bill cites an intelligence community assessment saying that “Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the United States presidential election.” It also expresses the sense of Congress that President Trump call on Russia to withdraw from Ukraine, and it states that “it is the policy of the United States … to support the Government of Ukraine in restoring its sovereign and territorial integrity.” In addition to Russia, H.R. 3364 also establishes and expands sanctions on Iran and North Korea.

The Senate passed H.R. 3364 on July 27, 2017 by a vote of 98 to 2 (Roll Call 175). We have assigned pluses to the nays because imposing new sanctions in the name of punishing the regimes’ provocations and aggression could itself be viewed as provocative and could result in push-back further involving the United States in the affairs of other countries and regions. Instead of acting as a global cop, America would be best served by returning to our traditional and constitutionally sound foreign policy of staying clear of foreign quarrels.

During consideration of the healthcare bill (H.R. 1628), Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) introduced an amendment that would have expired the expansion of Medicaid and certain taxes created under ObamaCare, prohibited healthcare plans that provide abortion coverage from qualifying for certain tax credits, banned federal funding of abortion, and repealed the individual and employer mandates created under ObamaCare.

The Senate rejected Paul’s amendment on July 26, 2017 by a vote of 45 to 55 (Roll Call 169). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because government should not subsidize the killing of innocent human life, and also because Senator Paul’s amendment would have repealed extensive portions of the unconstitutional ObamaCare law.

President Donald Trump nominated John Kenneth Bush to be a judge on the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. As chairman of the Louisville chapter of the Federalist Society, Bush is a strict constructionist. He has previously called for the repeal of ObamaCare, opposes public financing of campaign elections, opposes gay marriage, and is staunchly pro-life. On an online conservative blog, Bush equated abortion to slavery, describing them as the “two greatest tragedies in our country.”

The Senate confirmed Bush on July 20, 2017 by a vote of 51 to 47 (Roll Call 164). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because more judges are needed who will uphold the U.S. Constitution, as Bush intends.

The Countering Iran's Destabilizing Activities Act (S. 722) would impose new sanctions on Iran and Russia, and codify sanctions imposed by the Obama administration on Russia. The bill enjoyed strong bipartisan support. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on the Senate floor that "we must take a stronger stance in deterring Iran and holding its regime accountable for its actions and addressing Russia's years-long pattern of provocations." Those provocations, according to supporters of the bill, included Russia's military action in Ukraine, its intervention in Syria, and its alleged hacking of the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Maryland Senator Ben Cardin, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said that the bill "stands up to the aggression of Russia and Iran."

The Senate passed S. 722 on June 15, 2017 by a vote of 98 to 2 (Roll Call 147). We have assigned pluses to the nays because imposing new sanctions on Iran and Russia in the name of punishing the regimes' provocations and aggression could itself be viewed as provocative and could result in push-back further involving the United States in the affairs of other countries and regions. Instead of acting as a global cop, America would be best served by returning to our traditional and constitutionally sound foreign policy of staying clear of foreign quarrels.

During consideration of the Iranian and Russian sanctions bill (S. 722), Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) introduced an amendment to “affirm that the United States remains fully committed to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and will honor its obligations enshrined in Article 5.” Under Article 5, the member nations of the NATO military alliance “agree that an armed attack against one or more of them ... shall be considered an attack against
them all.”

The Senate adopted Graham’s amendment on June 15, 2017 by a unanimous vote of 100 to 0 (Roll Call 146). That not a single senator voted nay is appalling, since that is the constitutionally sound position. The reason: Not only should the United States stay clear of entangling alliances such as NATO, but the NATO provision that obligates the United States to go to war if any member of NATO is attacked undermines the provision in the U.S. Constitution that assigns to Congress the power to declare war. Moreover, the number of nations that the United States has pledged to defend under NATO has grown from 11 to 28 over the years, as the alliance itself has grown from 12 member nations (including the United States) when NATO was created in 1949 to 29 today. Although NATO was ostensibly formed to counter the threat from the Soviet bloc of nations, some of the nations the United States is now pledged to defend under NATO were once part of that bloc, including Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic (as part of Czechoslovakia), Hungary, Poland, and Romania.

Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) introduced this bill (Senate Joint Resolution 42) to block the sale of "certain defense articles" to Saudi Arabia, including laser-guided weapons systems and fighter aircraft. Paul has opposed selling arms to Saudi Arabia because the regime oppresses its own people, is engaged militarily in the civil war in Yemen, and has supported ISIS. "Who in their right mind would give money, arms, or share our technology with a country that has been supporting ISIS?" Paul asked on the Senate floor.

The Senate did not vote directly on S. J. Res. 42 but on a motion to discharge the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (where the resolution was pending) from further consideration of the resolution so that it could be considered by the full Senate. The discharge motion, which was made by Paul, was rejected on June 13, 2017 by a vote of 47 to 53 (Roll Call 143). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the United States should not interject itself in foreign conflicts such as the civil war in Yemen (via arms sales to one of the combatants in that conflict -- Saudi Arabia), and should not take steps tantamount to going to war without a declaration of war by Congress.

The Senate agreed to the omnibus appropriations bill on May 4, 2017 by a vote of 79 to 18 (Roll Call 121). We have assigned pluses to the nays because with this fiscal 2017 omnibus appropriations bill, Congress is failing to address its fiscally and constitutionally irresponsible budgeting and appropriating process that is currently yielding annual federal deficits measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars that contribute directly to the dramatic growth of our nearly $20 trillion national debt.

This legislation (House Joint Resolution 43) would disapprove of and nullify a Health and Human Services Department rule that prevents states that distribute federal family funding from prohibiting participation and receipt of funds by healthcare providers, such as Planned Parenthood, for any reason other than their ability to provide family planning services.

The Senate passed H. J. Res. 43 on March 30, 2017 by a vote of 50 to 50 with Vice President Mike Pence casting a tie-breaking "yea" vote (Roll Call 101). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because this bill limits the power of an unconstitutional federal government agency. The U.S. Constitution does not authorize the federal government to get involved in healthcare, much less establish a Department of Health and Human Services, so any attempt to limit the power of an unconstitutional federal agency is a step in the right direction.

This resolution of ratification (Treaty Document 114-12) would allow the Balkan country of Montenegro to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The NATO military alliance was created in 1949 for the stated purpose of countering the threat posed by the Soviet bloc. Under the North Atlantic Treaty establishing NATO, member nations "agree that an armed attack against one or more of them ... shall be considered an attack against them all." At first there were 12 countries in the alliance, but the number of member nations has more than doubled over the years to 28 - 29 with Montenegro's entry into NATO.

The Senate approved the treaty of ratification for admitting Montenegro into NATO by the very lopsided vote of 97 to 2 on March 28, 2017 (Roll Call 98; a two-thirds majority of those present and voting in the Senate is required to ratify a treaty). We have assigned pluses to the nays not only because the United States should stay clear of entangling alliances such as NATO but also because the NATO provision that obligates the United States to go to war if any member of NATO is attacked undermines the provision in the U.S. Constitution that assigns to Congress the power to declare war. Montenegro, which was part of communist Yugoslavia during the Cold War era, is now one of 28 countries the United States is obligated to defend under NATO.

This legislation (House Joint Resolution 69) would disapprove of and nullify a U.S. Department of Interior rule, "Non-Subsistence Take of Wildlife, and Public Participating and Close Procedures, on National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska," which was released in final form on August 5, 2016.

The Senate passed H. J. Res. 69 on March 21, 2017 by a vote of 52-47 (Roll Call 92). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because it reaffirms Alaska's sovereign power to manage its wildlife. Since the power of wildlife management was not granted to the federal government by the Constitution, it is reserved to Alaska and the other 49 states according to the 10th Amendment.

This legislation (House Joint Resolution 40) would disapprove of and nullify a Social Security Administration rule that outlines reporting of information by the agency on certain non-elderly individuals who receive disability insurance or Supplemental Security Income benefits for inclusion in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System for gun purchases if they receive benefits based on a finding of mental impairment and use a "representative payee" because they cannot manage their benefit payments.

The Senate passed H. J. Res. 40 on February 15, 2017 by a vote of 57 to 43 (Roll Call 66). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the Social Security Administration rule violates the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by infringing on the right of people to keep and bear arms.

This legislation (House Joint Resolution 38) would disapprove of and nullify the "Stream Protection Rule" issued by the Department of the Interior's Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement in 2016. This new rule would "jeopardize thousands of coal and coal-related jobs, devastate coal producing communities, and put a majority of the country's coal reserves off limits," according to the bill's lead sponsor in the House, Representative Bill Johnson (R-Ohio).

The Senate passed H. J. Res. 38 on February 2, 2017 by a vote of 54 to 45 (Roll Call 43). We have assigned pluses to the yeas not only because the federal government has no constitutional authority to issue environmental regulations, but also because environmental regulations such as the "Stream Protection Rule" destroy jobs and increase energy costs. Also, states already protect streamwater.

During consideration of the congressional budget for fiscal 2017 (Senate Concurrent Resolution 3), Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) offered an amendment to prevent the reduction of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits; an increase of the retirement age; or privatizing Social Security.

The Senate did not vote directly on Sanders' amendment but on a motion to waive all applicable sections of the budget law with respect to a point of order against Sanders' amendment. The Senate rejected this motion on January 10, 2017 by a vote of 49 to 49. (Roll Call 6; a three-fifths majority of the entire Senate -- 60 votes -- was needed to waive the applicable sections of the budget law). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the rapid projected growth in future spending for these programs under current law is unsustainable due to both the declining ratio between workers and Social Security recipients, and also the fact that people are living longer. Plus, there is no constitutional authorization for these programs. Those who genuinely want to help the needy should recognize that the best way to do it is to phase out government social-welfare programs in favor of private alternatives.

During consideration of the congressional budget for fiscal 2017 (Senate Concurrent Resolution 3) on January 4, 2017, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) pointed out in a speech on the Senate floor that this proposed budget would add nearly $10 trillion to our national debt over the next 10 years without ever balancing the budget. He added: "I'm not for it. That's not why I ran for office. It's not why I'm here. It's not why I spend time away from my family and from my medical practice. It's because debt is consuming our country." Paul went on to introduce a substitute amendment that would balance the budget by 2024.

The Senate rejected Paul's substitute amendment on January 9, 2017 by a vote of 14 to 83 (Roll Call 3). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because fiscal responsibility is an excellent first step toward constitutional responsibility.

This bill (S. 612) would authorize approximately $10 billion for construction of 30 Army Corps of Engineers water projects, including navigation, flood control, and environmental restoration projects. It would authorize $170 million in response to the lead-contaminated water system in Flint, Michigan.

The Senate agreed to S. 612 on December 10, 2016 by a vote of 78 to 21 (Roll Call 163). We have assigned pluses to the nays because Army Corps of Engineers water projects are unconstitutional. Nowhere does the Constitution give the federal government authority to “restore” or “improve” the environment or guarantee safe drinking water. Such projects, if needed, should be handled by the states and cities. Further, many of the Army Corps of Engineers projects actually have disastrous results, far from what was originally intended.

This bill (H.R. 2028) perpetuates Congress’ growing habit of avoiding hard decisions about the level of federal spending by kicking the can down the road into the middle of the new fiscal year, with a continuing resolution that would provide funding for federal government operations at the fiscal year 2016 level through April 28, 2017 at an annualized discretionary rate of $1.07 trillion.

The Senate agreed to H.R. 2028 on December 9, 2016 by a vote of 63 to 36 (Roll Call 161). We have assigned pluses to the nays because with this Continuing Appropriations bill Congress is failing to address its fiscally and constitutionally irresponsible budgeting and appropriating process that is currently yielding annual federal deficits measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars that contribute directly to the dramatic growth of our $20 trillion national debt.

This bill (S. 2943) authorizes $611.2 billion for military programs in fiscal year 2017, including $59.5 billion for foreign operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. Among its many provisions, the massive bill creates a “Global Engagement Center” to counter “foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation efforts.” Dubbed an Orwellian “Ministry of Truth” by critics including THE NEW AMERICAN, this new government propaganda center is authorized to “provide financial support” to (among others) “media content providers,” including “local independent media who are best placed to refute foreign disinformation and manipulation in their own communities.”

The Senate passed the final version (conference report) of S. 2943 on December 8, 2016 by a vote of 92 to 7 (Roll Call 159). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the authorizations in this bill go way beyond providing for our national defense. Our foreign military interventions in the Middle East in particular have exacerbated terrorism and undermined U.S. security. The creation of the Orwellian “Global Engagement Center,” which was added to the NDAA without Congress being able to vote on it as a stand-alone bill, also falls outside the scope of legitimate national defense. Rather than agreeing to the version of NDAA they did, our lawmakers should have rejected it and passed instead a constitutionally sound version.

This legislation (Senate Joint Resolution 39) would block the proposed $1.15 billion sale of tanks and other military equipment to Saudi Arabia. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who sponsored S. J. Res. 39, said prior to the vote that the debate should not just be about whether to “sell arms to Saudi Arabia,” but whether to “sell arms to Saudi Arabia for the war in Yemen,” where presumably the tanks would be used.

The Senate did not vote directly on S. J. Res. 39; it voted instead to table (kill) a motion to discharge S. J. Res. 39 from committee, thereby effectively killing the bill. The vote, on September 21, 2016, was 71 to 27 (Roll Call 145). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the United States should not interject itself in foreign conflicts such as the civil war in Yemen, and should not take steps tantamount to going to war without congressional debate and a declaration of war by Congress.

This bill (S. 524) would authorize $103 million annually through fiscal 2021 for the Department of Justice to award grants to state, local, and tribal governments to provide services relating to opioid abuse, including first-responder training for opioid overdose reversal drugs and treatment alternatives to incarceration programs. It also would establish a Health and Human Services Department grant program for states to encourage pharmacists to dispense opioid overdose reversal drugs pursuant to a “standing order,” which permits pharmacists to dispense medication without a person-specific prescription.

The Senate passed the final version (conference report) of S. 524 on July 13, 2016 by a vote of 92 to 2 (Roll Call 129). We have assigned pluses to the nays because attempting to help citizens deal with drug overdose and addiction is not a responsibility of the U.S. government under the Constitution. While it is arguably better to treat addicts as people having a medical problem rather than as criminals needing incarceration, this is not a constitutional use of taxpayer money. Such programs, if handled by government, should be handled by local or state governments rather than the federal government.

This substitute amendment to S. 764 would require the Department of Agriculture to establish a national mandatory disclosure standard for genetically modified organism (GMO) food within two years of the bill’s enactment. This bill as amended “prohibits states or political subdivisions of states from establishing or continuing requirements for labeling or disclosure of bioengineered or genetically engineered food that are not identical to the mandatory disclosure standard established by this bill.” Companies could choose to provide GMO disclosure through a symbol or by electronic bar codes that could be scanned by smart phones.

The Senate passed this amended version of S. 764 on July 7, 2016 by a vote of 63 to 30 (Roll Call 123). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the power to pass legislation regarding agriculture in general and the labeling of agricultural products in particular was not granted to Congress by the Constitution. Therefore, this amended version of S. 764 usurps the power of the states to pass laws regarding GMO labeling of food products.

This bill (S. 3100) would make states and cities ineligible for certain federal grants if they place restrictions on sharing information about the immigration status of individuals with the federal government or on fulfilling Homeland Security Department (DHS) requests to comply with “detainers,” or requests to keep an immigrant in custody.

The Senate did not vote directly on S. 3100 but on a motion to invoke cloture (and thus limit debate) so the bill could come up for a vote. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on July 6, 2016 by a vote of 53 to 44 (Roll Call 119; a three-fifths majority of the entire Senate is required to invoke cloture). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the presence of “sanctuary cities,” in which cities and states harbor illegal immigrants and protect them from deportation, is a violation of federal immigration law. Saying such cities and states are ineligible for federal grants, while imperfect in that it essentially uses federal (and likely unconstitutional) grant money as a “bribe,” is still a step in the right direction.

During consideration of the Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations bill (H.R. 2578), Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) offered an amendment that would authorize the attorney general to deny the transfer of a firearm to an individual who appears on the "no fly list" or the "selectee list" and would require notification to law-enforcement officials if an individual who has appeared on the Terrorist Screening Database within the last five years has requested a firearm transfer.

The Senate did not vote directly on Collins' amendment but on a motion to table (kill) another motion to send H.R. 2578 back to committee with instructions to add Collins’ amendment to the bill. The motion to table was rejected on June 23, 2016 by a vote of 46 to 52 (Roll Call 109). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because restricting non-criminals from flying is a violation of the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of "due process of law," and linking firearm ownership to a federal no-fly list is a violation of the Second Amendment's protection of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The federal no-fly list includes many people with no criminal record, and some people with identical or similar names to convicted criminals are erroneously placed on the list.

During consideration of the Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations bill (H.R. 2578), Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) offered an amendment to require that a background check be conducted for every U.S. firearm sale.

The Senate did not vote directly on Murphy’s amendment but on a motion to table (kill) another motion to send H.R. 2578 back to committee with instructions to add Murphy’s amendment to the bill. The motion to table was agreed to on June 20, 2016 by a vote of 56 to 42 (Roll Call 107). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because federally mandated background checks for all firearm purchases have long been a goal of gun-control advocates, as they could easily be used to restrict firearm ownership by setting arbitrary requirements for passing the background checks. Murphy’s amendment is a blatant violation of the Second Amendment, which prohibits the federal government from infringing upon the people’s right to keep and bear arms.

During consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 2943), Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.) introduced an amendment that would authorize an additional $18 billion in overseas contingency operations for domestic programs. Part of the $18 billion includes $1.1 billion to combat heroin and opioid addiction, $1.9 billion to implement an integrated campaign plan to counter ISIS, and $1.9 billion to treat the Zika virus and prevent Zika outbreaks.

The Senate did not vote directly on Reed’s amendment but on a motion to invoke cloture (and thus limit debate) so the amendment could come up for a vote. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on June 9, 2016 by a vote of 43 to 55 (Roll Call 95). We have assigned pluses to the nays because funding overseas contingency operations for domestic programs is not “defense” spending and does not belong in the NDAA. The federal government has no constitutional authority to engage in such spending for operations in other countries, and using American taxpayer dollars in an attempt to fight drugs and disease is inappropriate.

During consideration of the THUD (Transportation, Housing and Urban Development)-VA appropriations bill (H.R. 2577), Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced an amendment that would prohibit the use of funds to carry out the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) rule and notice of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.According to Tom DeWeese, a nationally known property rights activist, “AFFH requires communities that apply for HUD grants to strip search every neighborhood, detailing income level, religion, race, and national origin of every single person living there. HUD has created specific guidelines dictating specific numbers of each for a proper ‘balance.’ If there are any shortages in any of the categories, then the neighborhood is deemed to be ‘out of balance.’ HUD then requires that the community correct the situation…. The result is social engineering that is leading to the destruction of property values and property rights of neighborhoods.”

The Senate agreed to a motion to table (kill) Lee’s amendment on May 19, 2016 by a vote of 60 to 37 (Roll Call 81). We have assigned pluses to the nays because there is no authorization in the Constitution for Congress to establish and fund the Department of Housing and Urban Development in the first place, let alone fund the radical AFFH rule that imposes unconstitutional federal controls on local zoning and planning authorities.

This bill (H.R. 2577) would provide $56.5 billion in discretionary funding for transportation and housing and urban development-related agencies, and $83 billion in discretionary funding for military construction and veteran's affairs projects. Additionally, as amended, the bill would provide $1.1 billion in funding to combat the Zika virus for the remainder of fiscal 2016 and for fiscal 2017.

The Senate passed H.R. 2577 on May 19,2016 by a vote of 89 to 8 (Roll Call 82). We have assigned pluses to the nays because any federal involvement in the transportation or housing markets via regulations or subsidies is an overstepping of constitutional boundaries. Government involvement in the housing market can cause market distortions, and subsidizing housing for those who cannot afford it is a form of wealth redistribution. While helping veterans is arguably constitutional, the Department of Veterans affairs,and the Veterans Health Administration in particular, is a bloated, inefficient bureaucracy and a perfect example of the failures of socialized medicine. The federal government ought to cover veterans' healthcare costs but allow them to use the same private sector healthcare services that non-veterans use. This would be cheaper, offer better care, and be more efficient than the current VA boondoggle, and be constitutional.

This bill (H.R. 2028) would provide $37.5 billion in fiscal 2017 for the Energy Department, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Interior Department’s Bureau of Reclamation. It would provide approximately $30.7 billion for the Energy Department and $6 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers. Additionally, as amended, the bill would provide $95 million for wind energy from within the Energy Department’s energy efficiency and renewable energy funding.

The Senate passed H.R. 2028 on May 12,2016 by a vote of 90 to 8 (Roll Call 71). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the U.S. Constitution does not authorize the federal government to regulate or otherwise get involved in energy production. Particularly troubling is the $95 million subsidy for wind energy, which is an intermittent energy source that will not replace any conventional energy utilities. While chump change when compared to most federal spending, it is still unconstitutional and a crony-capitalist venture whereby the government is rigging the market by picking winners and losers. The federal government should stay out of energy production,period, and leave it up to a free market to decide what type of and how much energy should be produced.

This bill (H.R. 636) would reauthorize federal aviation programs through fiscal 2017, to the tune of $7.1 billion for the airport improvement program, $5.7 billion for air navigation facilities and equipment, $19.9 billion for Federal Aviation Administration operations, $335 million for research and development, and $310 million for the Essential Air Service. The bill would include new regulations and safety standards for small, private-sector drones, including those used for business purposes.

The Senate passed H.R. 636 on April 19,2016 by a vote of 95 to 3 (Roll Call 47). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the U.S. Constitution does not authorize the federal government to regulate and/or manage segments of the economy, such as aviation. Airplane manufacturers, airlines, and airports should all be privately run, and not subsidized by the federal government.

Regarding the private-sector use of drones, this is another area the federal government should stay out of. Local ordinances or, at most, state laws would be sufficient to manage any problems that might arise from this new technology.

During consideration of the FAA reauthorization bill (H.R. 636), Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) introduced an amendment that would authorize funding for additional Transportation Security Administration (TSA) teams for fiscal 2016 and 2017. Heinrich’s amendment would also expand the definition of law-enforcement terrorism-prevention activities to include mass shooting preparedness exercises.

The Senate adopted Heinrich’s amendment on April 7, 2016 by a vote of 91 to 5 (Roll Call 42). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the TSA is a classic example of federal overreach and should be abolished, not given additional funding. The TSA is known for its rude, inept employees who grope and otherwise violate air travelers, in the name of providing security. But rather than an inefficient, bloated, unaccountable federal bureaucracy, security should be provided by the airlines, which have a vested interest in keeping their customers safe. Regarding the expansion of terrorism-prevention activities to include mass-shooting preparedness exercises, this is another transparent attempt to federalize law enforcement and expand the police state. Constitutionally speaking, local law enforcement should handle shootings, not the federal government, even if the feds are working in conjunction with local law enforcement.

On February 11, 2016, President Obama nominated John B. King to succeed Arne Duncan as secretary of education. Immediately prior to assuming leadership of the Department of Education, King served as deputy secretary of education. Before that, he served as commissioner of education of the state of New York, overseeing the New York State Education Department, from 2011 to 2015. The liberal Huffington Post describes King as a “fierce supporter of Common Core.” As commissioner, he supervised the implementation of the Common Core State Standards in New York. Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) said about King, “He forced on an unwilling school system an unpopular Common Core curriculum and standards, inflexible testing regimes and
a flawed teacher evaluation system.”

The Senate confirmed the nomination on March 14, 2016 by a vote of 49 to 40 (Roll Call 36). We have assigned pluses to the nays because of King’s adamant support for Common Core and its universal one-size fits all approach to local education. Moreover, the Department of Education is unconstitutional.

During consideration of an energy policy bill (S. 2012), Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced an amendment specifying that national monuments declared by the president after the enactment of this amendment would expire after three years, except when the monuments are approved by federal and state law.

The Senate rejected Lee’s amendment on February 2, 2016 by a vote of 47 to 48 (Roll Call 10). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because U.S. presidents, including Obama, have established these national monuments through executive orders, thereby placing huge tracts of land off-limits to development, without the approval of either Congress or the states where the land is located.

This measure (Senate Joint Resolution 22) would provide for congressional disapproval of the “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule submitted by the Corps of Engineers and the EPA. See House Vote 21 for more information on this bill.

The Senate did not vote on S. J. Res. 22 itself but on a motion to invoke cloture (and thus limit debate) so the measure could come up for a vote. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on January 21, 2016 by a vote of 52 to 40 (Roll Call 5; a three-fifths majority of the entire Senate is required to invoke cloture). We have assigned pluses to the yeas. See House Vote 21 for the reason why.

This bill (H.R. 4038) would require that before a Syrian or Iraqi refugee could be permitted to enter the United States the FBI director would have to certify that a background check had been performed that was sufficient to ascertain whether the refugee would be a security threat,and that the Homeland Security secretary, with the agreement of the FBI director and the director of national intelligence, would have to certify that the refugee would not be a security threat.

The Senate did not vote on H.R. 4038 itself but on a motion to invoke cloture (and thus limit debate) so the bill could come up for a vote. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on January 20, 2016 by a vote of 55 to 43 (Roll Call 4; a three-fifths majority of the entire Senate is required to invoke cloture). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because Congress is authorized to protect each state against invasion.

The Federal Reserve Transparency Act (S. 2232) would “require a full audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Reserve banks by the Comptroller General of the United States,” according to the text of the bill. “I think that it’s about time we pull back the curtain to uncover this cloak of secrecy once and for all,” Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), the bill’s sponsor, noted.

The Senate did not vote on S. 2232 itself but on a motion to invoke cloture (and thus limit debate) so the bill could come up for a vote. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on January 12, 2016 by a vote of 53 to 44 (Roll Call 2; a three-fifths majority of the entire Senate is required to invoke cloture). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the Federal Reserve system, essentially a cartel of private banks functioning as a central bank, is unconstitutional and is responsible for much of the nation’s current financial problems via its control of money and credit. An audit of the Fed would shed light on its otherwise secretive practices and perhaps lead to its eventual abolishment.

The omnibus appropriations bill (H.R.2029) would provide $1.15 trillion in discretionary appropriations in fiscal 2016 for federal departments and agencies covered by the 12 unfinished fiscal 2016 spending bills. This represents an overall increase in discretionary spending of five percent over 2015 levels. See House Vote 20 for more details.

The Senate agreed to the omnibus appropriations bill on December 18, 2015 by a vote of 65 to 33 (Roll Call 339). We have assigned pluses to the nays because with this omnibus bill members of Congress are failing to address their fiscally and constitutionally irresponsible budgeting and appropriating process that is currently yielding annual federal deficits measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars, as well as minimizing their accountability to the voters by combining all discretionary federal spending for fiscal 2016 into one gigantic “take it or leave it” bill.

This bill (S. 1177), the Every Student Succeeds Act (first introduced as the Every Child Achieves Act), would reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESAA) for four years, through fiscal 2020. Total authorizations would be $24.5 billion for fiscal 2017, increasing to $26.1 billion in fiscal 2020. The bill would replace the No Child Left Behind Act, and continue the requirement for regular standardized testing in core subject areas such as math, reading, and science. Scores for the standardized tests are to be separated by categories such as race and income to determine if any “subgroup” is lagging academically. The bill would also require states to develop plans to help low-performing public schools.

The Senate passed S. 1177 on December 9, 2015 by a vote of 85 to 12 (Roll Call 334). We have assigned pluses to the nays because, as explained in House vote 19, the federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved with education; nowhere in the U.S. Constitution is education listed as one of the government’s enumerated powers. K-12 education, if publicly funded, should be run primarily by parents coordinating with local school districts rather than by a centralized bureaucracy out of Washington, D.C

This legislation (Senate Joint Resolution 24) would disapprove and nullify the Environmental Protection Agency’s rule relating to “Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units,” published on October 23, 2015. According to Congressional Quarterly, the EPA rule “sets different emissions targets for 49 states based on their existing energy profile and requires each state to reduce emissions by a certain amount by 2030.” Upon passage of the bill by the House of Representatives, Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), the original Senate sponsor, said in a statement, “Hardworking families cannot afford these crushing regulations that threaten jobs and affordable energy while doing little to actually improve the environment.”

The Senate passed S. J. Res. 24 on November 17, 2015 by a vote of 52 to 46 (Roll Call 306). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government should not hinder existing power plants with regulations that stifle energy production and increase rates, there is no authorization in the Constitution for the federal government to interfere in the energy sector, and CO2 is not a pollutant.

This legislation (Senate Joint Resolution 22) would provide for congressional disapproval of the “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule submitted by the Corps of Engineers and the EPA. According to Representative Steve Southerland (R-Fla.), sponsor of a similar bill in the House in September 2014, under this proposed WOTUS rule, “Federal agencies like the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers would see their regulatory authority under the Clean Water Act drastically expanded, to the point of covering almost any body of water throughout America, from ditches to culverts to pipes to watersheds to farmland ponds.”

The Senate passed S. J. Res. 22 on November 4, 2015 by a vote of 53 to 44 (Roll Call 297). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because both federal water regulations and the EPA are unconstitutional, and if the rule were to be allowed to go into effect, activities such as farming and real estate development would be greatly hampered, since farmers and developers would be subject to increased unconstitutional permit requirements and fines concerning their treatment of almost any “body of water,” no matter how small.

This bill (H.R. 1314) would suspend the national debt limit until March 15, 2017, at which time the ceiling on how much money the federal government is allowed to borrow would be re-established at the size of the federal debt at that time. The bill would also raise caps intended to limit “discretionary” federal spending by $50 billion for fiscal 2016 and $30 billion for fiscal 2017.

The Senate agreed to this legislation on October 30, 2015 by a vote of 64 to 35 (Roll Call 294). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the federal government should live within its means, suspending the debt limit is even worse than raising it, and most of the spending responsible for the ballooning national debt is unconstitutional.

This bill (S. 1881) would cut off federal funding of Planned Parenthood and its affiliates and clinics. Overall federal funding would not be reduced, since the funding “no longer available to Planned Parenthood will continue to be made available to other eligible entities to provide women’s health care services.”

The Senate did not vote directly on S. 1881 but instead on a motion intended to advance the bill. That motion, to invoke cloture and limit debate on a motion to proceed to the bill, was rejected on August 3, 2015 by a vote of 53 to 46 (Roll Call 262; the motion failed because a three-fifths majority of the entire Senate is required to invoke cloture). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government should not, and has no constitutional authority to, subsidize the killing of innocent human life.

During consideration of the surface transportation bill (H.R. 22), Senator Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) introduced an amendment to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank’s charter, which expired July 1, 2015, through fiscal 2019. As Senator Kirk said during debate on his amendment, “Unfortunately, as of July 1, the Ex-Im Bank has been unable to process any new transactions — and this poses a real threat to our economy. Business deals that are months or years in the making are now on hold, and may fall through, unless we reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank immediately.”

The Senate adopted Kirk’s amendment on July 27, 2015 by a vote of 64 to 29 (Roll Call 256). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the Export-Import Bank, as explained in House vote 16, is a poster boy for corporate cronyism. The government finances or insures foreign purchases from U.S. companies that commercial banks are unwilling or unable to finance owing to the political or commercial risks inherent in the deals, leaving taxpayers on the hook in the event of default.

During consideration of an otherwise relatively innocuous bill about public safety employee withdrawals, Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) made a motion to concur with a House amendment to the bill that would grant Trade Promotion Authority(TPA) to the executive branch. See House Vote 11 for further information.

The Senate agreed to TPA on June 24,2015 by a vote of 60 to 38 (Roll Call 219).We have assigned pluses to the nays because TPA would facilitate the subordination of the national independence of the United States to regional blocs of nations in a process that is leading toward a world government.

During consideration of the National Defense Authorization bill (H.R. 1735), Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.)introduced an amendment to ensure that the entire U.S. government complies with interrogation techniques permitted by Army Field Manual 2-22.3. Specifically,any individual in the custody of any U.S. government agent or detained at any U.S. government facility shall not be subjected to any interrogation technique, such as waterboarding,not authorized by Army Field Manual 2-22.3, entitled “Human Intelligence Collector Operations.” The amendment would also require that the Red Cross be allowed access to any detained individual. McCain’s amendment would require the U.S. secretary of defense to review Army Field Manual 2-22.3 every three years and revise it, if necessary, to ensure compliance with legal obligations of the United States, such as those contained within the Geneva Convention.

The Senate adopted McCain’s amendment on June 16, 2015 by a vote of 78 to 21 (Roll Call 209). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because any form of torture is a violation of a person’s God-given rights, regardless of whether or not the person is a U.S. citizen. In fact, the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits “cruel and unusual punishment.” The U.S. government is not above the rule of law, and any government agency or agent must be held accountable to a standard that respects human rights and dignity.

During consideration of the National Defense Authorization bill (H.R. 1735), Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) introduced an amendment to authorize the president to “provide for a temporary, emergency authorization of defense articles, defense services, and related training directly to the Kurdistan Regional Government,” according to the text of the amendment. On June 15, 2015,speaking in support of her amendment on the Senate floor, Senator Ernst said, “This bipartisan amendment … provides temporary authority for the president ... to provide weapons directly to Iraqi Kurdish Peshmerga forces in the fight against ISIS should the administration choose to do so.”

The Senate rejected Senator Ernst’s amendment on June 16, 2015 by a vote of 54 to 45 (Roll Call 210; a 60-vote threshold was required for passage pursuant to a unanimous consent agreement). We have assigned pluses to the nays because arming foreign fighters would be an act of war, and under the U.S. Constitution, only Congress may declare war. Moreover, our interventionist policy in the Middle East has exacerbated terrorism. In Syria, for example, arming the so-called moderate rebels helped create the ISIS threat. And regarding Iraq, arms sent to the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) could also fall into the hands of the rival Kurdistan
Workers’ Party (PKK), a communist terrorist group dedicated to the creation of a Marxist-Leninist state of Kurdistan. The KRG is divided between the more conservative Kurdistan Democratic Party (PDK) of Iraq and the left-wing Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), which is affiliated with the Socialist International.

Export-Import Bank.
During consideration of the defense authorization bill (H.R. 1735), Senator Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) introduced an amendment to reauthorize the U.S. Export-Import Bank through 2019. The bank issued loans and loan guarantees to foreign governments or companies for the purchase of U.S. products.

The Senate rejected a motion to table (kill) Kirk's amendment on June 10, 2015 by a vote of 31 to 65 (Roll Call 206). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government has no constitutional authority risking taxpayers' money to provide loans and terms that the private sector considers too risky to provide. Indeed, U.S. government-backed export financing is a form of corporate welfare, and if the Ex-Im Bank went bust (as happened to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae), the taxpayers would have been stuck holding the bag. The bank's charter was not reauthorized, and it expired on June 30, 2015.

Trade Adjustment Assistance.
During consideration of the Trade Promotion Authority bill (H.R. 1314), Senator Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) introduced an amendment to strike the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) provisions in the bill. Those provisions would extend the TAA program through June 30, 2021.

The TPA (see the next vote) is needed, its proponents acknowledge, to facilitate enactment of trade agreements negotiated by the Obama administration and supported by the GOP congressional leadership. Those agreements - the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), and Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) - collectively dubbed ObamaTrade, would, proponents boast, create jobs and prosperity for Americans. But the TAA, which ObamaTrade proponents also support, provides assistance to help American workers who lose their jobs because of the trade agreements.

The Senate rejected Flake's amendment on May 22, 2015 by a vote of 35 to 63 (Roll Call 190). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because federal jobs programs are unconstitutional. Moreover, it makes no sense to claim that the federal government must cough up federal funds to help workers who will lose their jobs to supposedly jobs-creating trade agreements.

Trade Promotion Authority.
The Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) section of H.R. 1314 would renew the on-again-off-again "fast track authority" that Congress has often awarded to the president over the past several decades. The essential features of TPA are: (1) Congress unconstitutionally delegates authority "to regulate commerce with foreign nations" to the Executive Branch; and (2) Congress dramatically increases the probability of approval of trade agreements by restricting itself to an up-or-down vote with no amendments or filibusters allowed. See also House Vote 10.

The Senate passed H.R. 1314 on May 22, 2015 by a vote of 62 to 37 (Roll Call 193). We have assigned pluses to the nays because TPA would facilitate the subordination of the national independence of the United States to regional trading blocs, a power that is not granted to any branch of government in the Constitution.

Loretta Lynch Nomination.
The Senate confirmed the nomination of Loretta Lynch for U.S. attorney general on April 23, 2015 by a vote of 56 to 43 (Roll Call 165). We have assigned pluses to the nays because Lynch is supportive of blatantly unconstitutional actions on the part of the executive branch.

Lynch supported President Obama's use of an executive order to offer de facto amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, and promised to implement such amnesty as attorney general. Lynch also supports civil forfeiture, which is certainly an unconstitutional violation of private property rights, and deems it an "important tool of the Department of Justice." As Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) stated in early February when explaining his opposition to Lynch's nomination, "She remains non-committal on the legality of drone strikes against American citizens, while I believe such strikes unequivocally violate rights granted to us by the Sixth Amendment.... Mrs. Lynch also supports President Obama's calls for executive amnesty, which I vehemently oppose. The Attorney General must operate independent of politics, independent of the president and under the direction of the Constitution. I cannot support a nominee, like Mrs. Lynch, who rides roughshod on our Constitutional rights."

Individual Mandate Repeal.
During consideration of a bill regarding Medicare payments to physicians (H.R. 2), Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) introduced an amendment entitled "Restoring Individual Liberty" that would repeal the individual mandate of the ObamaCare law.

The Senate rejected Cornyn's amendment on April 14, 2015 by a vote of 54 to 45 (Roll Call 137). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because no branch of government has been empowered by the Constitution to force Americans to buy health insurance.

Free Community College.
During consideration of the budget resolution (Senate Concurrent Resolution 11), Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) introduced an amendment to raise spending by $60.3 billion for social services education and jobs training in order to facilitate "two free years of community college paid for by raising revenue through requiring millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share."

The Senate rejected Baldwin's amendment on March 26, 2015 by a vote of 45 to 55 (Roll Call 100). We have assigned pluses to the nays because this resolution would steal wealth from some to give to others, cause an overabundance of workers in certain job fields (meaning grossly wasted funds), and expand unconstitutional federal involvement in education.

Common Core.
During consideration of the budget resolution (Senate Concurrent Resolution 11), Senator David Vitter (R-La.) introduced an amendment to create a spending-neutral reserve fund to prohibit the federal government from mandating, incentivizing, or coercing states to adopt Common Core standards or any other similar standards. This amendment would also allow states that have already adopted Common Core to opt out without penalty.

The Senate adopted Vitter's amendment on March 26, 2015 by a vote of 54 to 46 (Roll Call 105). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government has no constitutional authority to interject itself in the education sector, and Common Core is intended to create a national curriculum leading to nationalizing education.

UN Arms Treaty.
During consideration of the budget resolution (Senate Concurrent Resolution 11), Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.) introduced an amendment "to establish a spending-neutral reserve fund relating to prohibiting funding of international organizations during the implementation of the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty prior to Senate ratification and adoption of implementing legislation." The amendment essentially allows the chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate to reallocate spending to prevent implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty, provided such action does not raise new revenue or increase the deficit.

During debate on the amendment, Senator Inhofe remarked, "President Obama has signed the treaty but has not submitted it for ratification; for one reason, he knows the votes are not there. Two years ago, at 5 a.m. in the morning, 53 Senators, from both parties, voted for my amendment very similar to this. My amendment would prevent funds from going to the treaty Secretariat or any other organization that is working to implement this treaty."

The Senate adopted Inhofe's amendment on March 26, 2015 by a vote of 59 to 41 (Roll Call 108). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the UN Arms Trade Treaty is an attempt by a global governance body, the United Nations, to regulate weapons. Such regulation is at odds with the American ideals of national sovereignty and freedom to bear arms without infringement by government. While the UN likely wouldn't march into American neighborhoods to confiscate guns the moment the treaty was ratified, ratification of the treaty would be a step in the wrong direction. Any opposition to the UN Arms Trade Treaty is to be commended.

Executive Action on Immigration.
Senator Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) introduced a new version of the Homeland Security appropriations bill (H.R. 240), in the form of a substitute amendment, that would eliminate the bill's provisions prohibiting the use of funds for carrying out President Obama’s unconstitutional executive actions on illegal immigration. The provisions targeted for elimination would defund the Obama administration’s executive actions announced on November 20, 2014 to grant deferred action for an estimated four million illegal immigrants in the United States.

The Senate adopted Cochran's substitute amendment on February 27, 2015 by a vote of 66 to 33 (Roll Call 61). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the president is not a "king" or "dictator" who may make his own law. Under the U.S. Constitution, "all legislative powers herein granted" are delegated to Congress, and it is the responsibility of the president to faithfully execute the law.

Fracking.
During consideration of the Keystone XL pipeline bill (S. 1), Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) introduced an amendment to remove exemptions of fracking and natural gas storage from regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) offered the amendment on Senator Gillibrand's behalf, noting: "This amendment amends the Safe Drinking Water Act to protect clean drinking water sources from hydraulic fracturing, commonly known as fracking, and from underground storage of natural gas. The Safe Drinking Water Act currently exempts underground injection of fracking fluids and underground storage of natural gas from regulation under the act. The Gillibrand amendment repeals those exemptions and makes underground injection of fracking fluids and underground storage of natural gas subject to those regulations."

The Senate rejected Gillibrand’s amendment on January 28, 2015 by a vote of 35 to 63 (Roll Call 41). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the federal government has no constitutional authority to regulate industry practices or set drinking water standards. These standards are monitored and enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency, which is itself an unconstitutional agency created by executive order. The Obama administration, particularly the EPA, is known to be an opponent of fracking, so this is likely a backdoor attack on the industry. State and local governments should be setting drinking water standards and monitoring for pollutants, not unaccountable bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.

Executive Action on Immigration.
During consideration of the omnibus appropriations bill (H.R. 83), Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) raised a constitutional point of order that the bill violates the Constitution's separation of powers, its enumerated powers, and its requirement that the president faithfully execute the laws because the bill would fund activities related to President Obama's executive action on amnesty. During debate on his point of order, Cruz said, "If you believe President Obama's amnesty is unconstitutional, vote yes. If you believe President Obama's amnesty is consistent with the Constitution, then vote no."

The Senate rejected Cruz's point of order on December 13, 2014 by a vote of 22 to 74 (Roll Call 353). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because President Obama's executive amnesty was unconstitutional for the reasons listed above.

The Senate agreed with the House version of this appropriations bill on December 13, 2014 by a vote of 56 to 40 (Roll Call 354). We have assigned pluses to the nays because with this fiscal 2015 omnibus appropriations bill, Congress is failing to address its fiscally and constitutionally irresponsible budgeting and appropriating process that is currently yielding annual federal deficits measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars that contribute directly to the dramatic growth of our already $18 trillion national debt.

Keystone XL Pipeline.
S. 2280 would immediately allow TransCanada to construct, connect, operate, and maintain the Keystone XL pipeline, including any revision to the pipeline route within Nebraska as required or authorized by the state. It also would consider the January 2014 environmental impact statement issued by the State Department sufficient to satisfy all requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act. The bill would grant the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia exclusive jurisdiction regarding legal disputes over the pipeline or the constitutionality of the bill.

The Senate rejected S. 2280 on November 18, 2014 by a vote of 59 to 41, after having agreed by unanimous consent to raise the majority requirement for passage to 60 (Roll Call 280). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because this bill essentially gets the federal government out of the way of economic development. While one could correctly argue that the federal government should not have been involved in this issue in the first place, and that from a constitutional standpoint it should be left up to the states, private property owners, and TransCanada to work out an arrangement, this bill is definitely a step in the right direction since it would remove unconstitutional federal regulatory road blocks against the pipeline project.

Equal Pay.
The "Paycheck Fairness Act" (S. 2199) was intended to ensure that men and women receive equal pay for equal work by, for example, requiring businesses to demonstrate that pay-gaps between men and women with similar jobs and qualifications are "job-related with respect to the position in question; and ... consistent with business necessity." The bill also authorizes enhanced penalties for sex discrimination.

The Senate did not vote on the underlying bill itself but on a procedural motion to invoke cloture, and thus limit debate, so that the bill could come up for a vote. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on September 15, 2014 by a vote of 52 to 40 (60 votes, three-fifths of the full Senate, are needed to invoke cloture; Roll Call 262). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the federal government has no constitutional authorization to determine the value of employees' labor in the private sector, whether in the absolute sense or relative to other wages. Wages instead should be determined by the market.

Campaign Finance Constitutional Amendment.
Senate Joint Resolution 19 would propose an amendment to the Constitution granting Congress and state lawmakers the "power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in-kind equivalents with respect to federal and state elections." The resolution's proposed amendment would also prohibit "corporations or other artificial entities" created by law "from spending money to influence elections."

The Senate did not vote on S. J. Res. 19 itself but on a motion to invoke cloture, and thus limit debate, on the joint resolution so that it could come up for a vote. The Senate rejected this motion on September 11, 2014 by a vote of 54 to 42 (60 votes, three-fifths of the full Senate, are needed to invoke cloture; Roll Call 261). We have assigned pluses to the nays because this proposed constitutional amendment would effectively repeal the free speech provision of the First Amendment, since restricting the amount of money that may be spent on political speech would restrict political speech.

Illegal Immigrant Children Supplemental Appropriations.
S. 2648 would authorize $3.6 billion in supplemental appropriations, including $2.73 billion "to cover necessary expenses to respond to the significant rise in unaccompanied children and adults with children at the southwest border," $615 million for wildfire suppression activities of the Forest Service, and $225 million that would be provided "to the Government of Israel for the procurement of the Iron Dome defense system to counter short-range rocket threats."

During the floor debate, Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) commented that this bill is "a blank check that does not solve the crisis along our southern border.... Well, today we are exercising our constitutional right in cutting off funding for the President to expand his administrative amnesties."

The Senate did not vote on the underlying bill itself but on a motion to waive all applicable budget laws with respect to a point of order against the bill so that the bill could move forward. The Senate rejected this motion on July 31, 2014 by a vote of 50 to 44 (60 votes, three-fifths of the full Senate, are needed to waive the applicable budget laws; Roll Call 252). We have assigned pluses to the nays because most of the $3.6 billion requested by President Obama would be used to expand his amnesty program of deferred action for childhood arrivals, an unconstitutional usurpation of Congress' power to "to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization."

Gas Tax.
During consideration of the Highway Trust Fund re-authorization bill (H.R. 5021), Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced an amendment to transfer local transportation infrastructure projects to the states, rather than having the federal government fund and oversee the spending on such projects. Part of this would be accomplished by lowering the federal gasoline tax from the current 18.4 cents per gallon to 3.7 cents per gallon by 2019, and allowing the states to use that money for their own projects as they see fit.

Lee noted that his amendment "would empower States and communities to customize their own infrastructure according to their own needs, their own values, and their own imagination," and the amendment "would, over 5 years, gradually transfer funding and spending authority over local transportation infrastructure projects to the States."

The Senate rejected Lee's amendment on July 29, 2014 by a vote of 28 to 69 (Roll Call 246). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government has no constitutional authority to interject itself into local and state highway infrastructure projects in the first place. Constitutionally, the states should fund their own transportation projects, without the money for such projects being routed through Washington.

Contraception.
S. 2578 would force employers to pay for contraceptives (including abortifacients) even when they object on religious grounds. This legislation was introduced in response to the Supreme Court's June 2014 decision that Hobby Lobby could not be forced to cover employees' contraception because the owners had religious objections.

The Senate did not vote on the underlying bill itself but on a procedural motion to invoke cloture, and thus limit debate so that the bill could be advanced. The motion to invoke cloture was rejected on July 16, 2014 by a vote of 56 to 43 (60 votes, three-fifths of the full Senate, are needed to invoke cloture; Roll Call 228). We have assigned pluses to the nays not only because the federal government has no constitutional authority to determine what healthcare coverage employers provide but also because requiring anyone to pay for practices violating their religious convictions is immoral and un-American.

Workforce Training.
H.R. 803 would consolidate workforce training programs under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, reauthorize adult-education programs, and reauthorize other workforce-related programs under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

The Senate passed H.R. 803 on June 25, 2014 by a vote of 95 to 3 (Roll Call 214). We have assigned pluses to the nays because there is no constitutional authorization for federal workforce-training programs. This is not to say that workforce training is a bad thing, but such programs are best handled by the private sector, which would surely provide more and better jobs if the federal government were to siphon less money out of the economy for programs to improve the economy.

Fischer Nomination.
On January 10, 2014, President Obama nominated Stanley Fischer to be vice chairman of the Federal Reserve System Board of Governors. Before being tapped for the number two position at the Federal Reserve, Fischer had a notable career within globalist elitist ranks, previously serving as governor of the Bank of Israel from 2005 to 2013, first deputy managing director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) from 1994 to 2001, a distinguished fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and a participant of the 2011 Bilderberg meeting. Fischer is also a frequent speaker at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, which is one of the premier global think tanks and which has played an especially important role in promoting the WTO, IMF, United Nations, and supposed "free trade" agreements.

The Senate confirmed the nomination on June 12, 2014 by a vote of 63 to 24 (Roll Call 191). We have assigned pluses to the nays because Fischer's record indicates that he is supportive of central bank inflationary policies that create economic havoc. Moreover, the Federal Reserve, America's central bank that creates money out of thin air, is unconstitutional.

On April 11, 2014, President Obama nominated Sylvia Mathews Burwell to succeed Kathleen Sebelius as secretary of Health and Human Services. One of the most remarkable things about Burwell's resume is that she has served in so many high-level positions in government and the non-profit sector. For example, while serving for eight years in the Clinton administration, she rose to become deputy chief of staff to the president. During her decade serving in the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (2001-2011), she was executive vice president, chief operating officer, and president of the Global Development Program. Of course, the Gates Foundation is a huge financial supporter of pro-abortion organizations, such as Planned Parenthood Federation of America and International Planned Parenthood Federation, and has funded the creation of the Common Core educational standards. She is also a member of the globalist-minded Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), serving on its Board of Directors from 2007 to 2013, and the Trilateral Commission. With this network of establishment elite connections, Burwell is especially well suited to implement the unconstitutional, socialistic ObamaCare legislation.

The Senate confirmed the nomination on June 5, 2014 by a vote of 78 to 17 (Roll Call 175). We have assigned pluses to the nays because opposing the nomination of such a high-ranking establishment operative to be point person for implementing the unconstitutional ObamaCare law should be a no-brainer for Constitution-supporting senators.

During consideration of the bill to increase the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10 (S. 2223), Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) offered a motion to invoke cloture, and thus limit debate, so the bill could come up for a vote.

The Senate rejected Reid's motion to invoke cloture on April 30, 2014 by a vote of 54 to 42 (60 votes, three-fifths of the full Senate, are needed to invoke cloture; Roll Call 117). We have assigned pluses to the nays because any debate on the Senate floor that could prevent a federal minimum wage increase is a good thing. A federal minimum wage is unconstitutional, since nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government authorized to dictate how much private businesses pay their employees for services performed as part of a private, voluntary contract. Furthermore, many studies have demonstrated that minimum wage increases always lead to more unemployment among the poor and unskilled workers, the very people whom the wage increase is ostensibly intended to help.

This bill (H.R. 3979) was for the extension of unemployment benefits through May 31 of 2014. These extended benefits were to be paid for by adjustments to employers' pension contributions and by extending U.S. Customs and Border Protection user fees through 2024.

The Senate passed H.R. 3979 on April 7, 2014 by a vote of 59 to 38 (Roll Call 101). We have assigned pluses to the nays because, by paying people unemployment benefits, the federal government is essentially subsidizing unemployment. That the federal government does this in the first place is bad enough, but any extension of said benefits is even worse. At a time when government debt is nearly $17 trillion, paying unemployment benefits is fiscally irresponsible. Furthermore, the U.S. Constitution nowhere authorizes the federal government to provide unemployment benefits to workers. This type of welfare should be handled on the state or local level, if handled by the government at all.

The Senate version of this legislation - offered in the form of a substitute amendment to the House version, H.R. 4152 â€” would provide $150 million for direct aid to Ukraine. It would also provide for loan guarantees (meaning that the U.S. taxpayers would be stuck holding the bag if the loans are not paid). And it would impose sanctions on Russian and ex-Ukrainian officials deemed responsible for the crisis in the Ukraine.

The Senate adopted the substitute amendment to H.R. 4152 on March 27, 2014 by a vote of 98 to 2 (Roll Call 88). We have assigned pluses to the nays because foreign aid is unconstitutional. The rationale for providing U.S. aid to Ukraine is that the country needs our assistance to resist Russian hegemony and build "democracy." Yet the oligarchs wielding power in Ukraine are hardly "democrats," and (because money is fungible) U.S. assistance could effectively be funneled to Russia in the form of Ukrainian energy and debt payments.

This bill (S. 1086) would reauthorize the Child Care and Development Block Grant program through fiscal 2020 and would further institute new standards for education, health, and safety on child care providers that receive funds under this program. It would also expand the information required from states regarding how they will make use of the funds, as well as require that the states develop plans that include guidelines for training and teaching children from the time they are born until they enroll in kindergarten. The CBO has estimated that implementing this bill would cost $16.8 billion over the 2015-2020 period.

The Senate passed S. 1086 on March 13, 2014 by a vote of 96 to 2 (Roll Call 77). We have assigned pluses to the nays because childcare funding is an unconstitutional activity of the federal government. Just based on the brief description of S. 1086 in the above paragraph, it is clear that this bill would increase federal oversight of child care and impose national standards reminiscent of what the widely reviled Common Core State (read National) Standards are doing to K-12 education.

This bill (S. 540), entitled the "Temporary Debt Limit Extension Act," would suspend the national debt limit on federal debt through March 15, 2015 - the temporary aspect of the legislation. But the additional debt accumulated between enactment of this bill and March 15, 2015 would not be "temporary," since on the following day the legislation would automatically re-establish the debt limit at a higher level, reflecting the additional debt.

The Senate passed S. 540 on February 12, 2014 by a vote of 55 to 43 (Roll Call 34). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the federal government should live within its means, suspending the debt limit is even worse than raising it, and most of the spending responsible for the ballooning national debt is unconstitutional. (The House passed this bill on February 11; see House vote below.)

[ This bill (S. 540), entitled the "Temporary Debt Limit Extension Act," would suspend the national debt limit on federal debt through March 15, 2015 - the temporary aspect of the legislation. But the additional debt accumulated between enactment of this bill and March 15, 2015 would not be "temporary," since on the following day the legislation would automatically re-establish the debt limit at a higher level, reflecting the additional debt. ]

This bill (H.R. 2642) would reauthorize federal farm and nutrition programs through fiscal 2018, including crop subsidies and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, formerly known as food stamps. Though this legislation is entitled the Agriculture Act of 2014, most of the funding in the bill is not for agricultural programs but for food programs. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the final version of this legislation (conference report) would cost $956 billion over 10 years, of which $756 billion would be for nutrition programs.

The Senate passed the conference report on February 4, 2014 by a vote of 68 to 32 (Roll Call 21). We have assigned pluses to the nays because both farm aid and food aid are unconstitutional. The food subsidy programs are supposed to help the poor, but in practice they have done little to lift people out of poverty, as evidenced by the growing number of recipients of these programs. (The House passed the conference report on January 29, 2014; see House vote below.)

[ This bill (H.R. 2642) would reauthorize federal farm and nutrition programs through fiscal 2018, including crop subsidies and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, formerly known as food stamps. Though this bill is entitled the Agriculture Act of 2014, most of the funding in the bill is not for agricultural programs but for food programs. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the final version of this legislation (conference report) would cost $956 billion over 10 years, of which $756 billion would be for nutrition programs. ]

On January 16, 2014, the Senate accepted the House concurrence in the Senate version of the omnibus appropriations bill (H.R. 3547), completing congressional action. H.R. 3547 provides about $1.1 trillion in discretionary appropriations in fiscal 2014 for numerous federal departments and agencies. The legislation satisfies the $1.012 trillion cap on discretionary spending established by the December budget deal, which had repealed a portion of sequestration cuts provided by the 2011 debt limit law. This amounts to a 2.6 percent increase in discretionary spending compared to the sequester-reduced level for fiscal 2013. See House vote below for more information.

[During consideration of the omnibus appropriations bill (H.R. 3547), Rep. Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) moved that the House concur with the Senate version of the bill that would provide about $1.1 trillion in discretionary spending in fiscal 2014 for the following federal departments and agencies: Agriculture ($20.9 billion), Commerce-Justice-Science ($51.6 billion), Defense ($572 billion), overseas contingency operations associated with the war in Afghanistan and other counterterrorism operations ($85.2 billion), Energy-Water ($34.1 billion), Financial Services ($21.9 billion), Homeland Security ($39.3 billion), Interior-Environment ($30.1 billion), Labor-HHS-Education ($156.8 billion), Legislative Branch ($4.3 billion), Military Construction-VA ($73.3 billion), State-Foreign Affairs ($49 billion), and Transportation-HUD ($50.9 billion). The legislation satisfies the $1.012 trillion cap on discretionary spending established by the December budget deal, which had repealed a portion of sequestration cuts provided by the 2011 debt limit law. This amounts to a 2.6 percent increase in discretionary spending compared to the sequester-reduced level for fiscal 2013. The bill also includes $98 billion not subject to the budget cap, including funding for war-related and anti-terrorism programs, as well as disaster relief.]

The Senate agreed to the final version of H.R. 3547 on January 16, 2014 by a vote of 72 to 26 (Roll Call 13). We have assigned pluses to the nays because with this budget agreement Congress is failing to address its fiscally and constitutionally irresponsible budgeting and appropriating process that is currently yielding annual federal deficits measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars that contribute directly to the dramatic growth of our $17 trillion national debt.

On October 9, 2013, President Obama nominated Janet Yellen to succeed Ben Bernanke as chair of the Federal Reserve. Having served as vice-chair of the Fed since October 2010, Yellen is closely associated with Bernanke's decision to proceed with "QE (Quantitative Easing) unlimited," the Fed's unlimited purchasing of bonds until the market "substantially" improves. Yellen's promotion to chair is a clear indication that the Fed will continue to recklessly pump trillions of newly created fiat (unbacked) dollars into the economy, in turn radically expanding the money supply and further diminishing the purchasing power of the dollar to buy goods and services, which is especially burdensome to the poor and elderly. Furthermore, Yellen's policy of keeping interest rates artificially low will encourage additional irresponsible and excessive borrowing, as well as malinvestments.

The Senate confirmed the nomination on January 6, 2014 by a vote of 56 to 26 (Roll Call 1). We have assigned pluses to the nays because of the economic havoc, caused by inflation, that Yellen contributed to as vice-chair and that she intends to continue as the new chair of the Fed. Furthermore, a central bank, such as the Fed, that creates money out of thin air is not authorized by the Constitution.

On December 18, 2013, the Senate accepted the House concurrence in the Senate version of H. J. Res. 59, the budget agreement. See House vote below for more information.

[ During consideration of the Budget Agreement for fiscal 2014 (House Joint Resolution 59), Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) moved that the House concur with the Senate version of the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H. J. Res 59) that would increase the discretionary spending caps for fiscal 2014 and 2015 to $1.012 trillion and $1.014 trillion, respectively. This represents an increase of $26 billion for 2014 and $19 billion for 2015. Furthermore, this amounts to the elimination of $63 billion in sequester cuts for 2014 and 2015. Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) explained his no vote on this budget agreement in a Facebook post for December 24, 2013: "Instead of real compromise to reform the biggest budget items contributing to our $17 trillion debt â€” Social Security, military spending, and Medicare - the bill increases federal spending for special interests by tens of billions of dollars and pays for it by raising taxes on millions of Americans." ]

The Senate agreed to the final version of H. J. Res. 59 on December 18, 2013 by a vote of 64 to 36 (Roll Call 281). We have assigned pluses to the nays because with this budget agreement Congress is failing to address its fiscally and constitutionally irresponsible budgeting and appropriating process that is currently yielding annual federal deficits measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars that contribute directly to the dramatic growth of our $17 trillion national debt.

Employment Nondiscrimination.
This bill (S. 815) would prohibit employers, employment agencies, and labor organizations from discriminating against employees, applicants, or members on the basis of perceived or actual sexual orientation or gender identity. This essentially gives homosexual and transgender persons a "protected status" where employment is concerned. Religious organizations are exempt from this bill, but organizations owned by or affiliated with religious organizations are not.

The Senate passed the bill on November 7, 2013 by a vote of 64 to 32 (Roll Call 232). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the federal government is overstepping its constitutional boundaries by dictating the hiring practices of private employers. While the exemption for religious organizations is a good thing, the bill is still a serious infringement on private property rights as it limits what a person can and cannot do on his or her private property, in this case a business.

Debt Limit Increase Disapproval.
The legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by the president to fund the federal government including ObamaCare through January 15, 2014 (see below) also provided for the suspension of the national debt ceiling through February 7, 2014. By suspending this limit on how much money the federal government may borrow, the president can run up the national debt by whatever amount he deems necessary to meet government obligations, without having to ask Congress to once again increase federal borrowing authority. However, the legislation includes a procedure for Congress to disapprove of the president raising the national debt limit.

In accordance with this procedure, Senator Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) made a motion to consider a resolution (Senate Joint Resolution 26) to disapprove of President Obama suspending the national debt limit. His motion of disapproval was rejected on October 29, 2013 by a vote of 45 to 54 (Roll Call 220). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government should live within its means and because most of the spending responsible for the ballooning national debt is unconstitutional.

[ GOP Cave-in. The impasse over the continuing appropriations bill came to an end when, on the 16th day of the partial government shutdown, the House concurred in a Senate amendment that rewrote the House bill H.R. 2775, which had only contained a provision to prevent ObamaCare subsidies to individuals without verifying income, etc. As amended, the bill suspended the federal debt limit through February 7, 2014, and continued funding government operations through January 15, 2014 at the fiscal 2013 post-sequestration spending level. It did not include any provision to defund ObamaCare.]

Continuing Resolution.
This bill (H.R. 2775), as amended by the Senate (see below), was the result of a negotiated deal that ended the partial government shutdown over the Republican attempt to defund ObamaCare. It continued funding government operations, including ObamaCare, through January 15, 2014. The amount of spending in the bill was based on the fiscal 2013 post-sequestration spending level. The legislation also suspended the federal debt limit through February 7, 2014.

The Senate passed the bill on October 16, 2013 by a vote of 81 to 18 (Roll Call 219). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the negotiated deal contained in this bill constituted a cave-in by congressional Republicans that ended the Republican attempt to defund the unconstitutional ObamaCare law.

[ GOP Cave-in. The impasse over the continuing appropriations bill came to an end when, on the 16th day of the partial government shutdown, the House concurred in a Senate amendment that rewrote the House bill H.R. 2775, which had only contained a provision to prevent ObamaCare subsidies to individuals without verifying income, etc. As amended, the bill suspended the federal debt limit through February 7, 2014, and continued funding government operations through January 15, 2014 at the fiscal 2013 post-sequestration spending level. It did not include any provision to defund ObamaCare.]

Continuing Resolution/Defunding ObamaCare.
During consideration of the fiscal 2014 continuing appropriations bill (House Joint Resolution 59), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) offered a perfecting amendment that replaces the text of the continuing resolution with language supported by Senate Democrats. The amendment would strip from the bill language supported by the House to defund ObamaCare. It would also provide continuing appropriations to fund government operations from the start of fiscal year 2014 on October 1, 2013 through November 15, 2013 that would reflect an annual "discretionary" spending level of about $986.3 billion - approximately the same amount of discretionary spending in fiscal 2013.

The Senate adopted Reid's amendment on September 27, 2013 by a vote of 54 to 44 (Roll Call 208). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the Senate used this amendment to reject the House's attempt to defund the unconstitutional ObamaCare law. The impasse between the House-passed CR that would have defunded ObamaCare (see below) and the Senate language that continued funding ObamaCare along with other government operations, led to the 16-day partial government shutdown.

[ House Bill: House Joint Resolution 59 would provide continuing appropriations to fund government operations from the beginning of fiscal year 2014 on October 1, 2013 until December 15, 2013 at approximately the same amount of "discretionary" spending as fiscal 2013, and it would defund ObamaCare. This bill represents the House Republicans' implementation of the strategy for defunding ObamaCare via a continuing resolution (CR). The bill contains appropriations for huge amounts of unconstitutional spending, it would completely defund unconstitutional ObamaCare in fiscal 2014. ]

Continuing Resolution.
This vote represents Senate passage of the continuing resolution (House Joint Resolution 59), as amended by the Reid perfecting amendment (described by Senate vote below) to continue funding the federal government, including ObamaCare, through November 15, 2013.

[ Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) offered a perfecting amendment that replaces the text of the continuing resolution with language supported by Senate Democrats. The amendment would strip from the bill language supported by the House to defund ObamaCare. ]

The Senate passed this version of the continuing resolution on September 27, 2013 by a vote of 54 to 44 (Roll Call 209). We have assigned pluses to the nays because this vote affirmed the Senate's rejection of the House's attempt to defund the unconstitutional ObamaCare law. At the time, however, the House was unwilling to back down, and a modified version of the continuing resolution - albeit one including the ObamaCare funding - was later passed by both the Senate and the House (see below).

[ GOP Cave-in. The impasse over the continuing appropriations bill came to an end when, on the 16th day of the partial government shutdown, the House concurred in a Senate amendment that rewrote the House bill H.R. 2775, which had only contained a provision to prevent ObamaCare subsidies to individuals without verifying income, etc. As amended, the bill suspended the federal debt limit through February 7, 2014, and continued funding government operations through January 15, 2014 at the fiscal 2013 post-sequestration spending level. It did not include any provision to defund ObamaCare.]

Transportation-HUD Appropriations.
This appropriations bill (S. 1243) would provide $54 billion in fiscal 2014 for the Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Total spending called for by the bill would be "about $5.6 billion more than the current level under the sequester," according to Congressional Quarterly. And much of the spending allocations â€” such as $19.6 billion for the Section 8 rental-assistance program â€” is unconstitutional.

Republicans filibustered against the bill because of the amount of spending it contained. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who favored the bill, offered a motion to invoke cloture, in order to break the filibuster and allow the bloated bill to come to a vote. But the Senate rejected Reid's motion on August 1, 2013 by a vote of 54 to 43 (60 votes - three-fifths of the full Senate - are needed to invoke cloture; Roll Call 199). We have assigned pluses to the nays not only because the bill called for more spending but also because much of the spending is unconstitutional.

The money that would be used for military aid to Egypt would instead, under Paulâ€™s amendment, be redirected for the repair of U.S. bridges and other critical national highways.

The Senate agreed to the motion and killed the Paul amendment on July 31, 2013 by a vote of 86 to 13 (Roll Call 195). We have assigned pluses to the nays because a reduction in foreign aid, particularly in the form of military assistance, is a good thing. The Constitution does not authorize the government to give foreign aid and meddle in other nationsâ€™ internal affairs, so while Paul's amendment would allow for the resumption of aid to Egypt, it would still be an improvement on the status quo.

Student Loans.
During consideration of the Keep Student Loans Affordable Act of 2013 (S. 1238), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) offered a motion to invoke cloture and thus end debate on the bill so it could be voted on. This act would serve to extend the 3.4-percent interest rate on undergraduate Stafford loans disbursed to students between July 1, 2011, and July 1, 2013 to between July 1, 2011, and July 1, 2014.

The Senate rejected Reid's motion, and thus did not invoke cloture, on July 10, 2013 by a vote of 51 to 49 (Roll Call 171). We have assigned pluses to the nays because forcing a vote on an unconstitutional action of the federal government is a bad thing. The U.S. government should not be in the business of subsidizing higher education to begin with, and continuing a low interest rate on student loans would merely encourage this unconstitutional activity. Additionally, owing to the ease of obtaining government loans for education and the sheer amount of unpaid student debt, the nation is now facing a colossal "student debt bubble" that could have severe negative economic consequences.

Immigration Reform.
This bill (S. 744) would provide an overhaul of U.S. immigration policy that features the granting of immediate legal status for most illegal immigrants in the United States (aka amnesty), new visa programs for a wide range of workers from low-skilled to high-skilled, and new border security measures (only reducing the illegal immigration rate by 25-50 percent according to the Congressional Budget Office). While the rate of legal immigration into the United States is currently about one million per year, this bill would raise the average legal immigration rate to several million per year.

The Senate passed the Immigration Overhaul on June 27, 2013 by a vote of 68 to 32 (Roll Call 168). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the large-scale amnesty and new visa programs coupled with a lack of effective border security would lead to both large increases in legal immigration and continuing large-scale illegal immigration, even though the U.S. government has the duty under Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution to "protect [every state] against Invasion." Furthermore, we have assigned pluses to the nays because, by granting amnesty, increasing levels of legal immigration, and permitting continued large-scale illegal immigration, this bill provides a transition to the open borders sought by the advocates of a North American Union and other regional government schemes threatening our national sovereignty.

Border Security.
During consideration of the Immigration Overhaul (S. 744), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) offered a motion to table (kill) an amendment offered by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) that would "not allow the processing of this new category called registered provisional immigrants until Congress votes that the border is secure." Paul's amendment featured a requirement that Congress certify every year for five years that the border is secure or at least making specific progress toward border security as defined in detail by the amendment. If Congress would vote in any of these five years that the border is not becoming more secure, then the processing of people as "registered provisional immigrants" as provided for in S. 744 would stop until Congress would vote that the border is becoming more secure.

The Senate agreed to Reid's motion and killed the Paul amendment on June 19, 2013 by a vote of 61 to 37 (Roll Call 154). We have assigned pluses to the nays because it is the constitutional duty of the United States to "protect [every state] against Invasion" (Article IV, Section 4).

Food and Farm Programs. The farm bill (S. 954) would authorize federal farm and food programs through fiscal 2018. It would also replace direct payments to farmers with a new "adverse market payments" program that would provide subsidies when prices fall below a historic reference. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the total cost of S. 954 would be $955 billion for the 10-year period 2014-2023. This legislation is generally referred to as the farm bill, but most of the spending is for SNAP (formerly known as food stamps) and other "nutrition" programs in the bill. CBO estimates that the nutrition programs would cost $760 billion over 10 years, compared to $41.4 billion for farm commodity programs.

The Senate passed the farm bill on June 10, 2013 by a vote of 66 to 27 (Roll Call 145). We have assigned pluses to the nays because both federal food and farm subsidies are unconstitutional. Though the CBO estimates that S. 954 would cost $18 billion less over 10 years than under current law, this reduction would only be 1.9 percent of projected spending.

Product Labeling for Genetically Modified Food. During consideration of the Farm Bill (S. 954), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) offered an amendment (Amendment 965) to allow states to require that any food, beverage, or other edible product have a label indicating that it contains a genetically engineered ingredient, such as pesticide-resistant plants.

Sen. Sanders remarked during consideration of his amendment: "This is a pretty simple issue, and the issue is do the American people have a right to know what they are eating, what is in the food they are ingesting and what their kids are eating.... What this amendment does is very simple. It basically says States that choose to go forward on this issue do have the right. It is not condemning GMOs or anything else. It is simply saying that States have the right to go forward."

The Senate rejected Sanders' amendment on May 23, 2013 by a vote of 27 to 71 (Roll Call 135). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government does not have the constitutional authority to prevent states from enacting their own product-labeling requirements.

Internet Sales Tax. This bill (S. 743) would allow states to require out-of-state retailers with annual online sales that exceed $1 million to collect sales taxes on items delivered to the state. States would have to simplify how they collect and audit their sales taxes, and provide free software to retailers to calculate the taxes owed. States would not be allowed to impose different sales tax requirements on out-of-state online sellers from those required of in-state retailers.

The Senate passed S. 743 on May 6, 2013 by a vote of 69 to 27 (Roll Call 113). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the Internet sales tax would essentially be a tax on interstate commerce, which is unconstitutional according to Article I Section 9: "No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State." Furthermore, requiring online retailers to collect sales taxes from numerous states would pose onerous burdens to small businesses and hinder economic growth.

"Assault Weapons" Ban. During consideration of gun control legislation (S. 649), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) offered an amendment that would ban the future manufacture, import, sale, transfer, or possession of certain semi-automatic firearms considered to be "assault weapons."

According to an article by Tim Brown entitled "Dianne Feinstein's Assault Weapons Ban Defeated," posted on freedomoutpost.com on April 17, 2013, "The legislation that would have banned the sale of 157 different semi-automatic weapons, including handguns and even shotguns, along with high capacity magazines has come to its much deserved end. This bill was similar but even more expansive than her previous gun ban bill that was passed in 1994 and signed into law by Bill Clinton."

The Senate rejected Feinstein's amendment on April 17, 2013 by a vote of 40 to 60 (Roll Call 101). We have assigned pluses to the nays because banning firearms from law-abiding citizens is a clear violation of the Constitution - the Second Amendment guarantees that our "right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

During the floor debate on this amendment, Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) made these remarks, "Mr. President, I oppose the amendment. In 2004, we had a study by the Department of Justice, which is the last time we had the large-capacity magazine banned. It found no evidence banning such magazines has led to a reduction in gun violence. The study also concluded it is not clear how often the outcomes of the gun attack depend on the ability of offenders to fire more than 10 shots without reloading. The report found no evidence more people would be alive if a magazine over 10 rounds was banned. Secondly, there is no evidence banning these magazines has reduced the deaths from gun crimes. In fact, when the previous ban was in effect, a higher percentage of gun crime victims were killed or wounded than before it was adopted."

The Senate rejected Blumenthal's amendment on April 17, 2013 by a vote of 46 to 54 (Roll Call 103). We have assigned pluses to the nays because banning high-capacity ammunition clips for law-abiding citizens is a clear violation of the Constitution - the Second Amendment guarantees that our "right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

UN Arms Trade Treaty. During consideration of the budget resolution (Senate Concurrent Resolution 8), Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) offered an amendment to "uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty." As firearms researcher John Lott pointed out in "Buyers, beware: UN Arms Trade Treaty will regulate individual gun ownership," posted on FoxNews.com: "Unsurprisingly, the U.N. treaty provisions are the long-time favorites of American gun control advocates: registration and licensing of guns and ammunition, along with restrictions on the private gun transfers." Although Inhofe's amendment is non-binding, it provides encouragement that if and when the UN Arms Trade Treaty is brought to the Senate floor for a vote, there will not be the necessary two-thirds majority required for ratification.

The Senate adopted Inhofe's amendment on March 23, 2013 by a vote of 53 to 46 (Roll Call 91). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because a UN treaty that infringes on the Second Amendment of the Constitution should not be ratified.

Keystone XL Pipeline. During consideration of the budget resolution (Senate Concurrent Resolution 8), Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) offered an amendment that would "establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to promote investment and job growth in United States manufacturing, oil and gas production, and refining sectors through the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline."

According to a Reuters story posted online on March 22, 2013, "The Senate easily passed on Friday a symbolic measure approving the Canada to Texas Keystone XL oil pipeline, a move backers said showed strong support for a bill that would give Congress power to green light the project later in the year.... It was symbolic because the budget is a blueprint that will not become law."

(See House Vote below for information on similar legislation.)

According to a Reuters story posted online on May 22, 2013, "The project has been hailed by the energy industry as part of the U.S. push toward energy independence. It is also supported by many unions because it would provide thousands of construction jobs. Environmentalists have vociferously opposed the pipeline, saying it would raise greenhouse gas levels and lock the United States into long-term dependence on fossil fuels." >

The Senate adopted Hoeven's amendment on March 22, 2013 by a vote of 62 to 37 (Roll Call 61). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government should allow entrepreneurs to develop energy resources, rather than deny access.

Balanced Budget Resolution. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) offered a substitute amendment with a replacement budget (Amendment 263) to the budget resolution (Senate Concurrent Resolution 8). The amendment called for a balanced budget in five years with no revenue increases. As Paul said, "This budget is called the Revitalize America Budget. It reforms and saves Social Security and Medicare, making them solvent for 75 years; it creates millions of jobs by letting taxpayers keep an additional $600 billion of their income; it repeals ObamaCare; and it requires Congress to vote to approve or disapprove all major regulations. Our ever-expanding debt is costing us millions of jobs a year. It is time to stop burying our kids in debt."

Paul's proposed budget would also have eliminated the Commerce, Housing and Urban Development, Education, and Energy departments. A tax code overhaul that would eliminate the estate and capital gains taxes and switch to a flat tax system was also included.

The Senate rejected Paul's substitute amendment on March 22, 2013 by a vote of 18 to 81 (Roll Call 69). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because any reduction of unconstitutional federal agencies and massive amounts of debt-laden, unconstitutional federal spending, without revenue increases, is desirable.

Short-term Debt Limit Increase. This bill (H.R. 325), voted on in January 2013, would suspend the public debt limit through May 18, 2013 and in effect allow the Treasury Department to borrow as much as it needs in order to pay its bills over the next four months: February, March, April, and May. Another provision in the bill would withhold pay for representatives or senators if either house fails to approve a budget by April 15. The pay would be withheld for each member of Congress until his or her house agrees to a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal 2014 or until the last day of the 113th Congress.

The Senate passed H.R. 325 on January 31, 2013 by a vote of 64 to 34 (Roll Call 11). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the federal government should live within its means and because most of the spending responsible for the ballooning national debt is unconstitutional.

Disaster Supplemental (Superstorm Sandy). This bill (H.R. 152) would appropriate $50.5 billion in emergency supplemental funding for communities hit by Superstorm Sandy. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The bill would include $11.5 billion for FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund, $10.9 billion for transit systems, $16 billion for Department of Housing and Urban Development community development programs, $5.4 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers, $708 million for repairs to national parks, wildlife refuges and facilities, $234 million for Veterans Affairs medical activities and construction projects, $274 million for Coast Guard projects, and $520 million for Small Business Administration disaster loans."

The Senate passed H.R. 152 on January 28, 2013 by a vote of 62 to 36 (Roll Call 4). We have assigned pluses to the nays because federally financing disaster relief is unconstitutional.

Continuing Resolution. House Joint Resolution 117 would provide continuing appropriations for the federal government from October 1, 2012 through March 27, 2013. This would amount to an annualized rate of $1.047 trillion in "discretionary" spending for regular appropriations, and would include a 0.6 percent increase in funding for most federal programs and agencies. This continuing resolution would also provide nearly $100 billion in war funding and $6.4 billion in advance disaster relief funds.

To put this appropriations bill into perspective, consider what the Congressional Budget Office reported on August 22, 2012: "For fiscal year 2012 (which ends on September 30), the federal budget deficit will total $1.1 trillion, CBO estimates, marking the fourth year in a row with a deficit of more than $1 trillion." This deficit is based on the CBO's estimates of $2.435 trillion in federal revenue and $3.563 trillion in federal outlays for fiscal 2012. Therefore, 32 percent of every federal dollar spent in 2012 had to be borrowed. For 2011, 2010, and 2009 the shortfall has been 36, 37, and 40 percent respectively.

The Senate passed H. J. Res. 117 on September 22, 2012 by a vote of 62 to 30 (Roll Call 199). We have assigned pluses to the nays because passage of this mammoth continuing resolution provided a way for Congress to perpetuate its fiscally irresponsible, unconstitutional spending habits with a minimum of accountability to its constituents.

Cybersecurity. The Cybersecurity Act of 2012 (S. 3414) would create a National Cybersecurity Council under the chairmanship of the secretary of Homeland Security. The council would impose "voluntary" standards -- with incentives for compliance -- for owners of critical computer networks.

The Senate rejected a motion to invoke cloture -- and thus end a filibuster so the bill could come up for a vote -- on August 2, 2012 by a vote of 52 to 46 (Roll Call 187; a three-fifths majority vote of the entire Senate -- 60 votes -- was needed to invoke cloture.) We have assigned pluses to the nays because the private owners of critical infrastructure are already heavily regulated and don't need to be further burdened with additional supposedly voluntary regulations in the name of cybersecurity.

Tax Cut Extension. In view of the looming "fiscal cliff" of expiring tax cuts, tax increases, and automatic spending cuts set to take place January 1, 2013, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) offered a bill (S. 3412) to extend the expiring Bush-era tax rates for one year only for individuals earning less than $200,000 or families earning less than $250,000. Prior to a vote on the bill, Sen. Orrin Hatch (RUtah) offered a substitute amendment to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for all income levels for one year. Hatch's substitute would also extend the current estate tax levels, with a 35-percent tax on estates worth more than $5 million. Without congressional action, this tax will jump next year to as high as 55 percent on estates worth more than $1 million.

The Senate rejected Hatch's substitute amendment on July 25, 2012 by a vote of 45 to 54 (Roll Call 183). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because extending the tax cuts keeps more money in the hands of citizens, where it can be invested into the economy, thus spurring economic growth. Of course, the deficits need to be eliminated, but the way to accomplish this is to cut spending, not increase taxes. (After the substitute amendment was rejected, the Senate passed Reid's bill to raise taxes for the "rich.")

DISCLOSE Act. The Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) Act of 2012 (S. 3369) would require independent and corporate donors to disclose campaign related disbursements totaling more than $10,000 in an election cycle.

The Senate rejected a motion to invoke cloture (and thus end a filibuster so the bill could be voted on) on July 17, 2012 by a vote of 53 to 45 (Roll Call 180; a three-fifths majority vote of the entire Senate -- 60 votes -- was needed to invoke cloture).

We have assigned pluses to the nays because the legislation would have a chilling effect on political free speech by exposing donors to threats and intimidation. Free speech is protected by the First Amendment, which makes no exceptions for anonymous political donors, stating simply: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech." In fact, some of the Founding Fathers engaged in anonymous free speech at times, such as when Madison, Jay, and Hamilton wrote The Federalist Papers under the pseudonym "Publius."

The Senate adopted the final version of the bill (known as a conference report) on June 29, 2012 by a vote of 74-19 (Roll Call 172). We have assigned pluses to the nays because much of the spending is unconstitutional.

The Senate rejected Johanns' amendment on June 21, 2012 by a vote of 56 to 43 (Roll Call 159; by unanimous consent, the Senate had agreed to require 60 votes for adoption of the amendment). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the EPA is an unconstitutional agency created by executive order. It should not even exist, let alone engage in aerial surveillance for the purpose of detecting supposed violations of its regulations. Furthermore, while the surveillance is conducted from "public" airspace, so to speak, the air is not the subject of the surveillance. The use of the air is not unconstitutional, but the purpose of that use is unconstitutional, since it violates the Fourth Amendment protection against search of one's person, house, papers, and effects without probable cause and a warrant "particularly describing ... the persons or things to be seized."

Farm Bill. The Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2012 (S. 3240) would authorize federal farm and food assistance programs for five years. The programs include crop subsidies, food stamps, and foreign food aid. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the programs authorized by the bill would cost $969 billion if implemented over the next 10 years.

The Senate passed S. 3240 on June 21, 2012 by a vote of 64 to 35 (Roll Call 164). We have assigned pluses to the nays because federal agricultural subsidies and food aid are unconstitutional.

EPA Regulations. After the Environmental Protection Agency established the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards that cap toxin emissions from coal-fired power plants, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) sponsored a joint resolution (S. J. Res. 37) to nullify the regulations. Sen. Inhofe said the "EPA's Utility MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) is designed to destroy jobs by killing off the coal industry. EPA admits itself that the Utility MACT rule would cost an unprecedented $11 billion to implement. Of course these costs will come in the form of higher electricity rates for every American.... The Utility MACT would destroy over 1 million jobs and cost the American economy billions of dollars."

A motion to proceed to consideration of the measure was defeated on June 20, 2012 by a vote of 46 to 53 (Roll Call 139). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the EPA is an unconstitutional agency created by executive order, and while the Commerce Clause allows Congress to regulate trade between states, federal agencies do not have constitutional authority to impose environmental regulations on industry. Moreover, the regulations will lead to the premature closure of many power plants, leading to more expensive, less reliable electricity for consumers.

Aid to North Korea. During consideration of the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2012 (S. 3240), Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) offered an amendment to prohibit federal food assistance to North Korea.

The Senate rejected Kyl's amendment on June 20, 2012 by a vote of 43 to 56 (Roll Call 145). We have assigned pluses to the yeas not only because North Korea is a totalitarian regime, but also because foreign aid is unconstitutional.

Regarding the need for his amendment, Sen. Lee stated: "The Federal Government owns about two-thirds of the land in my own State. It owns nearly 30 percent of the land mass within the territorial boundaries of the United States. We do a lot to conserve that land. But when we use this money -- money estimated to amount to about $200 million a year in authorization, about $1 billion over a 5-year period -- we are using that money to take land out of use. We are using that money to pay people not to use their land for anything. Whenever we look for areas in which we can save money, one area is to not pay people not to use their land."

According to the Forest Service's website: "The Forest Legacy Program (FLP), a Federal program in partnership with States, supports State efforts to protect environmentally sensitive forest lands.... To maximize the public benefits it achieves, the program focuses on the acquisition of partial interests in privately owned forest lands. FLP helps the States develop and carry out their forest conservation plans. It encourages and supports acquisition of conservation easements, legally binding agreements transferring a negotiated set of property rights from one party to another, without removing the property from private ownership. Most FLP conservation easements restrict development, require sustainable forestry practices, and protect other values."

The Senate rejected Senator Lee's amendment to S. 3240 on June 20, 2012 by a vote of 21 to 77 (Roll Call 147). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the Constitution does not grant Congress the legislative power to acquire ownership of or conservation easement rights over large tracts of land within the states.

FDA Regulation of Food & Dietary Supplements. During consideration of the FDA user-fee authorization bill (S. 3187), Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) offered an amendment to prohibit FDA from regulating food or dietary supplements as drugs and censoring product health claims. Paul's amendment would also "prohibit employees of the Food and Drug Administration from carrying firearms and making arrests without warrants."

The Senate tabled (killed) Paul's amendment on May 24, 2012 by a vote of 78 to 15 (Roll Call 107). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the FDA censorship of health claims is a violation of the right to free speech protected by the First Amendment, and because the federal government is using armed agents to enforce unconstitutional regulations -- e.g., against the selling of raw milk.

Export-Import Bank. This legislation (H.R. 2072) reauthorized the U.S. Export-Import Bank for two years and increased the agency's lending cap from $100 billion to $140 billion. The bank issues loans and loan guarantees to foreign governments or companies for the purchase of U.S. products.

The Senate passed H.R. 2072 on May 15, 2012 by a vote of 78 to 20 (Roll Call 96). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the federal government has no constitutional authority risking taxpayers' money to provide loans the private sector considers too risky to provide. Indeed, U.S. government backed export financing is a form of corporate welfare, and if the Ex-Im Bank goes bust (as happened to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae), the taxpayers will get stuck holding the bag.

Oil and Gas Development; Keystone XL Pipeline. During consideration of S. 1813, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) offered an amendment to open up part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and natural-gas development, expand lease sales for offshore drilling, and approve the Keystone oil pipeline.

The Senate rejected Roberts' amendment on March 13, 2012 by a vote of 41 to 57 (Roll Call 38). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government should allow entrepreneurs to develop energy resource, rather than deny access to the resources.

Energy Tax Extensions. During consideration of S. 1813, Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) offered an amendment to extend already-lapsed and soon-to-expire programs intended to promote renewable energy -- including a lapsed stimulus program that allowed businesses to receive grants (as opposed to tax credits) for renewable-energy projects, and a production tax credit for wind energy producers set to sunset at the end of the year.

The Senate rejected Stabenow's amendment on March 13, 2012 by a vote of 49 to 49, under an agreement requiring 60 votes for passage (Roll Call 39). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the government has no constitutional business rewarding government-favored business interests. Instead, the market should decide "winners" and "losers" in the energy sector, as in other sectors of the economy, to ensure that wasteful, harmful, or inefficient entities are kept to a minimum.

Offshore Oil and Gas Development. During consideration of S. 1813, Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) proposed an amendment that would have allowed for more leases for offshore drilling than does the current plan. As explained by Vitter on the House floor, his amendment "would allow us to go back to the previous lease plan for the Outer Continental Shelf, replacing the current Obama administration lease plan which cuts that previous plan in half and moves us in the wrong direction in terms of producing our abundance of domestic energy, including oil and natural gas."

The Senate rejected Vitter's amendment on March 8, 2012 by a vote of 43 to 55 (Roll Call 28). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government should allow entrepreneurs to develop energy resources, rather than deny access to the resources.

EPA Boiler Emission Regulations. During consideration of S. 1813, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) offered an amendment intended to provide regulatory relief from the EPA's new emission standards for industrial boilers. Collins warned that the "rules have an estimated cost of $14 billion, and 200,000 jobs would be lost." Her amendment would require the EPA to propose revised, supposedly less-burdensome, rules 15 months after enactment of her measure. It would also allow manufacturers at least five years after the effective date of the finalized rules to bring their facilities into compliance.

The Senate rejected Collins' amendment on March 8, 2012 by a vote of 52 to 46, under an agreement requiring 60 votes for passage (Roll Call 30). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the EPA is unconstitutional and EPA regulations harm the economy. Though Collins' amendment would not have killed the boiler regulations, it would at least have delayed them.

Religious Exemptions for Healthcare. During consideration of the surface transportation authorization bill (S. 1813), Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) offered an amendment to "protect rights of conscience with regard to requirements for coverage of specific items and services." The Obama administration insists that under ObamaCare all employers must provide contraceptive coverage, even if they oppose such coverage for religious reasons. Blunt's amendment would have enabled health insurance plans to exclude coverage that the plan's sponsors or employers oppose as a matter of conscience.

The Senate tabled (killed) Blunt's amendment on March 1, 2012 by a vote of 51 to 48 (Roll Call 24). We have assigned pluses to the nays because, to quote Thomas Jefferson, "No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority."

Congressional Term Limits. During consideration of a bill to ban congressional insider trading (S. 2038), Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) offered an amendment "To express the sense of the Senate that the Senate should pass a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution that limits the number of terms a Member of Congress may serve." However, Roger Sherman stated at the 1787 Constitutional Convention: "Frequent elections are necessary to preserve the good behavior of rulers. They also tend to give permanency to the Government, by preserving that good behavior, because it ensures their re-election." Sherman's statement contains the essence of the argument against term limits, which is that the best incentive for an elected official to represent the interests of his constituents is the possibility of reelection.

The Senate rejected DeMint's amendment on February 2, 2012 by a vote of 24 to 75 (Roll Call 11). We have assigned pluses to the nays because congressional term limits would decrease the accountability of Congressmen to their constituents by increasing the number of lame-duck Congressmen serving in each congressional session.

Debt Limit Disapproval. House Joint Resolution 98 would have disapproved of President Obama's request to raise the national debt limit by an additional $1.2 trillion, to $16.4 trillion. Under the debt deal of August 2011, enactment of a resolution of disapproval was needed to prevent this increase from going into effect. The House passed the resolution, but the Senate failed to do so.

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) moved to proceed to H. J. Res. 98, but his motion was rejected on January 26, 2012 by a vote of 44 to 52 (Roll Call 2). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government should live within its means and because most of the spending responsible for the ballooning national debt is unconstitutional.

The Senate adopted the final version of this legislation (known as a conference report) on December 17, 2011 by a vote of 67 to 32 (Roll Call 235). We have assigned pluses to the nays because many of the bill's spending programs -- e.g., education, housing, foreign aid, etc. -- are unconstitutional, and the country is running trillion-dollar annual deficits.

Indefinite Detention. Detaineerelated language in the Defense authorization bill (S. 1867) was written in such a sweeping way that even the United States can be considered part of the battlefield in the global war against terror -- and even American citizens accused of being terrorists can be apprehended by the U.S. military and detained indefinitely without habeas corpus and without even being tried and found guilty in a court of law. Several attempts were made to revise the language, including an amendment offered by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to prohibit U.S. citizens from being held indefinitely without being charged or given a trial.

The Senate rejected this amendment on December 1 by a vote of 45 to 55 (Roll Call 214). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the War on Terror must not be allowed to destroy legal protections stretching back to the Magna Carta.

Agriculture-Commerce-Justice-Science-Transportation-HUD Appropriations. This so-called "minibus" bill (H.R. 2112) combined into a single package three of the regular appropriations bills -- Agriculture, Commerce-Justice-Science, and Transportation-Housing and Urban Development (HUD) -- for fiscal 2012. Just the "discretionary" spending in the minibus for the three-bill package totaled $128.1 billion. In addition, there is the spending that the government deems "mandatory." In the case of the Agriculture bill that was incorporated into the minibus, for instance, the appropriations include $116.8 billion in mandatory spending in addition to $19.8 billion in discretionary spending. The so-called mandatory spending in the Agriculture bill includes nearly $99 billion for food and nutrition programs.

The Senate passed the final version (conference report) of this legislation on November 17, 2011 by a vote of 70 to 30 (Roll Call 208). We have assigned pluses to the nays because Congress has no constitutional authority to fund many of the programs in the bill, including the farm programs, food programs, and housing (under HUD).

Net Neutrality. Senate Joint Resolution 6 would have nullified the "net neutrality" rules issued by the Federal Communications Commission in December 2010 and scheduled to become effective November 20, 2011. The new rules give the federal government more control over the Internet. "The FCC reversed its successful hands-off approach ... by passing net neutrality rules where the FCC has essentially granted itself power over all forms of communication including the Internet," warned Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), who spearheaded S. J. Res. 6. She added that the "regulations on broadband providers" in the net neutrality rules "establish the FCC as the Internet's gatekeeper, a role for which government is not really suited when innovation could be stifled."

Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) moved to proceed to the resolution, but the Senate rejected his resolution on November 10 by a vote of 46 to 52 -- thereby thwarting the attempt to nullify the net neutrality rules (Roll Call 200). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the federal government has no business serving as a gatekeeper for the Internet, and such a role could eventually threaten what has become an important public square for circulating ideas and information.

Cross-state Pollution. Senate Joint Resolution 27 would nullify the EPA's cross-state pollution rules targeting sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide power plant emissions. The House had already passed related legislation that would delay implementation of the EPA rules but not actually eliminate them.

Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) moved to proceed to the resolution, but the Senate rejected his motion November 10 by a vote of 41 to 56 -- thereby thwarting the attempt to stop the EPA cross-state pollution rules (Roll Call 201). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because these rules will further damage the economy and also because the federal government has no constitutional authority to regulate power plant emissions.

South Korea Trade Agreement. On a single day - October 12, 2011 - both the House and Senate approved three separate trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama. These measures are three more in a series of "free-trade agreements" intended to transfer the power to regulate trade (and eventually other powers too) to super-national arrangements via a step-by-step process. NAFTA is a prime example of such an arrangement. So is the developing continental government now known as the European Union, which is an outgrowth of a free-trade arrangement once called the Common Market. In fact, the Common Market-EU trajectory to regional governance served as a model for the formation of NAFTA.

The South Korea agreement, to quote Congressional Quarterly, is "considered the most economically important trade deal since the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement." For this reason, the "Freedom Index" editors selected this vote over the other two (Colombia and Panama) for inclusion in this index.

The Senate passed H.R. 3080 on October 12, 2011 by a vote of 83 to 15 (Roll Call 161). We have assigned pluses to the nays because agreements such as this one are intended to transfer trade (and other) powers to super-national arrangements, despite the fact that under the Constitution only Congress has the power "to regulate commerce with foreign nations."

Jobs Program. The Obama-Democrat jobs bill (S. 1660) would provide $175 billion in spending for transportation infrastructure projects, extending long-term unemployment benefits, preventing lay-offs of teachers and first responders, and upgrading public schools and community colleges. It would also extend and expand the current employee payroll tax cut. But it would offset the costs of the bill by imposing a 5.6 percent surtax on household income above $1 million.

The Senate rejected a motion to invoke cloture (and thus end debate so the bill could come up for a vote) on October 11, 2011 by a vote of 50 to 49 (Roll Call 160; a three-fifths majority vote of the full Senate -- 60 votes -- was needed to invoke cloture). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the way to create jobs is not to provide them via government financing of certain sectors of the economy, but to reduce the government's burden on the economy.

Trade Promotion Authority. During consideration of the trade-preferences bill, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) introduced an amendment to reinstitute trade promotion authority through 2013 for the purpose of expediting approval of trade bills. The authority, which was called "fast track" when initially instituted, had expired in 2007. The fast-track procedure requires that Congress must not amend or filibuster trade agreements submitted to them by the President, and must either approve or disapprove of the agreements within 90 days of submission. Renewing trade promotion authority is considered crucial for picking up the pace for approving future free-trade agreements such as the South Korea trade agreement.

The Senate rejected McConnell's amendment on September 20, 2011 by a vote of 45 to 55 (Roll Call 141). We have assigned pluses to the nays because trade promotion authority limits the ability of Congress to deliberate and legislate. Moreover, treaties should need a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate for approval.

Joint Resolution 25 would disapprove of President Obama\'s intent to raise the national debt ceiling by an additional $500 billion on top of the immediate $400 billion increase under last August\'s budget deal (Senate vote #12 above). If the motion of disapproval were enacted, the additional $500 billion increase would not go into effect. S. J. Res. 25 is similar to H. J. Res. 77.

The Senate rejected a motion to proceed to the resolution of disapproval on September 8 by a vote of 45 to 52 (Roll Call 130). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because piling on more and more debt is devastating to the economy.

Debt Deal. This legislation (S. 365) provided for an immediate $400 billion increase in the national debt limit, while allowing the President to raise the ceiling an additional $500 billion unless Congress passes a resolution of disapproval on September 14, 2011 by a vote of 232 to 186 (Roll Call 706).

This legislation also established a process for reducing future cumulative deficit projections by up to $2.4 trillion for fiscal years 2012 through 2021, including the establishment of a supercommittee tasked with recommending cuts totaling up to $1.5 trillion for the 10-year period. If the supercommittee were to fail in recommending at least $1.2 trillion in cuts (and, as we know, the supercommittee failed to recommend any cuts), then the legislation would trigger automatic cuts totaling up to $1.2 trillion over 10 years.

The debt-raising/deficit-cutting package created the appearance that Congress was doing something to rein in out-of-control spending. But in reality, the total national debt would still increase even if the entire dollar amount of cuts called for in the legislation were identified and enacted, since the cuts are not cuts in the absolute sense but cuts in future budget projections. The national debt would continue to go up, but not as fast as before, for the simple reason that cutting (say) $1.2 trillion over 10 years will not offset projected annual $1 trillion-plus deficits.

The Senate agreed to the House-passed version of the bill on August 2, 2011 by a vote of 74 to 26 (Roll Call 123). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the debt deal allows both the national debt and spending to continue their upward trajectories.

IMF Loans. During consideration of a bill on executive branch nominations (S. 679), Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) introduced an amendment to repeal the authority to provide certain loans to the International Monetary Fund, and to rescind up to $108 billion previously appropriated for the IMF. The IMF is an adjunct of the United Nations and grants foreign aid to qualifying countries.

The Senate rejected the DeMint amendment on June 29, 2011 by a vote of 44 to 55 (Roll Call 99). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because there is no authority in the U.S. Constitution for redistributing American wealth to other countries.

Ethanol Subsidies Repeal. During consideration of the economic development bill (S. 782), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) introduced an amendment that would end the 45-cents per-gallon tax credit that refiners get for blending ethanol with gasoline and the 54-cents-per-gallon tariff on imported ethanol. These federal energy subsidies currently cost about $6 billion per year. Critics of the ethanol subsidy say ethanol production for use in fuels hurts the environment, gums up engines, and raises food prices. According to DesMoinesRegister.com, "About 40 percent of last year's U.S. corn crop went toward ethanol production."

The Senate adopted Feinstein's amendment on June 16, 2011 by a vote of 73 to 27 (Roll Call 90). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the Constitution does not authorize the federal government to subsidize alternative energy sources.

Patriot Act (Firearms Purchase Records). During consideration of the Patriot Act extension bill (S. 990), Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who opposes the Patriot Act on constitutional grounds, offered an amendment that would have banned the use of Patriot Act searches for American citizens' firearms records without the Fourth Amendment's protections of probable cause, warrants, and particularity. Gun Owners of America, which supported this amendment, warned: "Without Paul's exemption, it is possible that the BATFE could go to a secret (FISA) court, and, in a one-party (ex parte) proceeding, obtain an order to produce every 4473 [firearms transaction record] in the country, ostensibly because a 'terrorism investigation' requires it. If such an action were taken, the government would have a list of every gun buyer in the country going back decades."

The Senate tabled (killed) Rand Paul's amendment on May 26, 2011 by a vote of 85 to 10 (Roll Call 82). We have assigned pluses to the nays because Paul's amendment would have prevented the Patriot Act from being used to violate the rights of gun owners.

Patriot Act Extension. This legislation (S. 990) extended for four years three provisions of the Patriot Act that were set to expire: the "roving wiretap" provision that allows the federal government to wiretap any number of a suspect's telephone/ Internet connections without specifying what they will find or how many connections will be tapped; the "financial records" provision that allows the feds to seize "any tangible thing" that has "relevance" to an investigation; and the "lone wolf" provision that allows spying on non-U.S. citizens without a warrant. These provisions violate the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which requires that no warrants be issued "but upon probable cause" (a much higher standard than "relevance"), and that warrants must contain language "particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The Patriot Act even allows the FBI to issue warrants called "National Security Letters" without going to a judge, though this provision was not set to expire and therefore was not part of this legislation.

The Senate passed S. 990 on May 26, 2011 by a vote of 72 to 23 (Roll Call 84). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the extended provisions, and the Patriot Act as a whole, violate the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

ObamaCare Defunding. House Concurrent Resolution 35 would direct the House clerk to insert a section in the enrollment of H.R. 1473 (Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011) that would bar the use of funds made available in the bill to implement the provisions of the 2010 healthcare overhaul law. Since full repeal of the ObamaCare law had already been rejected in the Senate, this attempt to defund the implementation of ObamaCare for fiscal year 2011 was made.

The Senate rejected H. Con. Res. 35 on April 14, 2011 by a vote of 47 to 53 (Roll Call 59). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because there is no constitutional authority for the federal government to require individuals to purchase health insurance or to manage the healthcare industry.

Planned Parenthood Defunding. House Concurrent Resolution 36 would have directed the House clerk to insert a section in the enrollment of H.R. 1473 (Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011) that would prohibit the use of any funding in the bill for Planned Parenthood.

The House adopted H. Con. Res. 36 on April 14, 2011, but the Senate rejected it the same day by a vote of 42 to 58 (Roll Call 60). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because Planned Parenthood is the nation's largest abortion provider and government should not subsidize the killing of innocent human life. Moreover, under the Constitution, the federal government should not be subsidizing any private entity in the marketplace.

Greenhouse-gas Regulation. During consideration of a small-business bill (S. 493), Sen. Mitch McConnell (RKy.) offered an amendment to prohibit the EPA from regulating greenhouse-gas emissions from stationary sources for the purpose of addressing climate change.

The Senate rejected McConnell's amendment on April 6, 2011 by a vote of 50 to 50 (Roll Call 54). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because restricting greenhouse-gas emissions would be harmful to the economy, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are not pollutants, and the federal government has no constitutional authority to limit such emissions.

ObamaCare (1099 Reporting Requirement Repeal). This bill (H.R. 4) stripped the very unpopular 1099 reporting requirement out of ObamaCare. This was significant because it was the first component of ObamaCare to be repealed by Congress. This reporting requirement for businesses and real estate owners to file a 1099 form with the IRS for every vendor to whom they paid more than $600 a year had been added to the ObamaCare legislation as a way to raise $19 billion by reducing tax fraud; however, business organizations protested that the 1099 requirement would bury businesses in additional, costly paperwork.

The Senate passed H.R. 4 on April 5, 2011 by a vote of 87 to 12 (Roll Call 49). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the burdensome 1099 reporting requirement was added to the ObamaCare legislation as a way to help pay for this unconstitutional program.

Authority for Military Action. During consideration of a small-business bill (S. 493), Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) moved to send the bill to the Foreign Relations Committee with instructions to insert his amendment expressing the sense of the Senate that "the President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation." Paul's amendment was in response to President Obama undertaking U.S. military action in Libya without congressional authorization.

The Senate tabled (killed) Rand Paul's motion on April 5, 2011 by a vote of 90 to 10 (Roll Call 50). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the U.S. Constitution assigns to Congress the power "to declare war."

Subsidized Airline Service. During consideration of the FAA reauthorization bill (S. 223), Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) offered an amendment to end the Essential Air Service program, which provides subsidies to airlines to maintain otherwise unprofitable commercial airline service to certain small communities.

The Senate tabled (killed) the McCain amendment on February 17, 2011 by a vote of 61 to 38 (Roll Call 21). We have assigned pluses to the nays because the federal government has no constitutional authority to subsidize private airlines, and the free market should be allowed to determine which communities commercial airlines service, as well as the cost and extent of that service.

ObamaCare Repeal. Since widespread opposition to ObamaCare propelled the Republicans to a substantial majority in the House in the 2010 elections, it was appropriate that the Republicans arranged for a vote on repealing ObamaCare very early in the first session of the 112th Congress. Dubbed the "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act," H.R. 2 would repeal both the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" (PL 111-148) and the "Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010" (PL 111-152), known collectively as ObamaCare. Passage of this repeal bill would be the best solution to the ObamaCare problem because it is worded to be effective as of the original date of enactment of PL 111-148 and 152 and would repeal both laws, as well as restore and revive the provisions of law that had been amended or repealed by ObamaCare, as if ObamaCare had never been enacted.

The essential text of the House's bill (H.R. 2) "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act" was brought to a vote in the Senate by Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) as an amendment to S. 223, the FAA reauthorization bill. The Senate rejected Senator McConnell's amendment on February 2, 2011 by a vote of 47-51 (Roll Call 9). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because the 2010 healthcare overhaul law (PL 111-148 and 111-152), popularly known as ObamaCare, is unconstitutional. There is no constitutional authority for the federal government to require individuals to purchase health insurance or to manage the healthcare industry.